A Sri Lankan court has convicted former Inspector General of Police Pujith Jayasundara and former Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando of criminal liability for failing to act on intelligence warnings before the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks, marking a significant departure from historical patterns of protecting…
In a decision that represents a notable shift in Sri Lanka's approach to accountability, a Trial-at-Bar court has convicted two of the country's former most senior public officials for their role in the Easter Sunday bombing tragedy. Former Inspector General of Police Pujith Jayasundara and former Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando were found criminally liable by a two-to-one majority for failing to act on repeated intelligence warnings that preceded the 2019 attacks on churches and hotels. Both were sentenced to death. The verdict prompted emotional reactions from victims' families, with one parent acknowledging that while justice had been served, it could not restore the lives lost.
The conviction represents a dramatic reversal from the case's earlier legal history. In 2022, a three-judge panel had unanimously acquitted both men at the close of the prosecution's case, finding insufficient evidence. However, following an appeal by the Attorney General, the Supreme Court in 2024 overturned the acquittal and ordered a retrial before a differently constituted bench. The court determined that the prosecution had presented adequate evidence requiring the accused to defend themselves against the charges. This series of proceedings illustrates how independent judicial systems can reach different conclusions when examining the same facts under different circumstances and leadership.
The verdict holds particular significance within Sri Lanka's recent political history. One of the central demands of the 2022 Aragalaya people's movement, which ousted President Gotabaya Rajapaksa's government, was that public officials be held accountable for failures in their duties. The conviction demonstrates that such accountability is possible, even for those who once held the highest offices. Beyond the Easter bombing itself, the decision may encourage other families seeking justice in cases involving disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and mass violence that have marked Sri Lanka's past, including cases involving journalist Prageeth Ekneligoda and editor Lasantha Wickrematunge.
However, commentators note that ordinary criminal trials may have limited capacity to address the scale of historical abuses in Sri Lanka comprehensively. While criminal courts can determine individual liability based on evidence meeting strict standards, they are less equipped to handle large-scale patterns of violence where thousands are involved and evidence has degraded over time. The 2015 government commitment to establish Truth and Reconciliation Commissions and other transitional justice mechanisms alongside criminal prosecutions remains unfulfilled. The Easter verdict thus signals institutional evolution while underscoring the need for broader mechanisms to address historical accountability and provide acknowledgement to victims on a larger scale.
