news
There was reason why Shangri-La was attacked twice during Easter Sunday carnage – Dayasiri
By Rathindra Kuruwita
There was a reason why two suicide bombers had attacked the Shangri-La Hotel but the Taj Hotel had been spared, State Minister Dayasiri Jayasekera, on Tuesday night, told the PCoI investigating the Easter Sunday attacks.
External powers had played a role in electing Sri Lankan Presidents and governments since 2015, Jayasekera said. The witness said it must be found out who wanted to remove former President Maithripala Sirisena from power.
The State Minister had been summoned to the PCoI to give evidence about the anti-Muslim riots in Hettipola following the Easter Sunday Attacks. On May 13, 2019, there was unrest in Hettipola, after six youth, arrested over involvement in attacking Muslim-owned properties and mosques in Kiniyama, were brought to the Hettipola Police Station from Bingiriya. When a crowd surrounded the Hettipola Police Station, Jayasekera, who lived close by arrived at the scene and took the youth back to Bingiriya Police Station after the police, civil administrators and community leaders of the area agreed that releasing the six youth on police bail was the best course of action.
Jayasekera: “This incident happened on my public day. Some people came and told me that there was unrest in the town. So I went to the Hettipola Police Station by 12 noon. The OIC told me that there were six youth sent from the Bingiriya Police Station. The OIC also said that during a meeting, it had been agreed to release them. I was told that then State Minister Nalin Bandara too had agreed to the decision. He said that they had to take the youth back to Bingiriya but it was impossible to do so because of the crowd that had gathered outside. I also felt that we needed to get these suspects out of the town. So I spoke to people, got the six people in my vehicle and went to Bingiriya with police protection.”
Chairman of the PCoI: “You are also a lawyer. Should politicians influence how people are arrested or released?”
Jayasekera: “No! I had no involvement in securing their release.”
Chairman of the PCoI: “After the attacks, you said that Taj Hotel in Colombo had not been attacked because some people were staying there. Can you elaborate on that?”
Jayasekera: “Taj is owned by a businessman that belongs to a particular country. A suicide bomber came and left without blowing himself up. There is a reason why there were two attacks on Shangri La hotel and none on Taj. There were also reports that during the time of the attacks, some VIPs were at Taj. That’s why I said that.”
The Chairman of the PCoI then asked Jayasekera why he had said that NTJ leader Zahran Hashim had international links. The witness said that it was the first time that the ‘leader’ of a terrorist group had taken part in the first wave of attacks and died.
“Why would a leader die in the first wave unless there was some good reason? Because of the attacks, President Sirisena could not seek a second term. There may have been some issues concerning Sirisena’s presidency, but he was trying his best to eliminate the drug mafia. The terrorists attacks marked the end of the country’s war on drugs. Now, former IGP, Pujith Jayasundara says the warnings of the attack came from a foreign intelligence source. So, this external intelligence agency knew when the attacks would happen. To be honest Presidents and governments have been brought into power in Sri Lanka by external powers from 2015. In a way Zahran too was a victim, Maithripala and Ranil Wickremesinghe too are victims. Jayasundara and Former Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando too are victims,” Jayasekera said.
The PCoI Chairman asked Jayasekera whether the former government had remained on national security in a satisfactory manner. Jayasekera too was a Cabinet Minister in the yahapalana government between 2015 and 2018.
The witness said that there had been many disagreements within the government. Sirisena was not at all happy with cosponsoring a resolution in Geneva in 2015, he said.
“These disagreements affected national security. I wouldn’t say that national security was neglected but it surely was affected by the internal disagreements,” MP Jayasekera said.
Author
- News Advertiesment
See Kapruka’s top selling online shopping categories such as Toys, Grocery, Flowers, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Clothing and Electronics. Also see Kapruka’s unique online services such as Money Remittence,News, Courier/Delivery, Food Delivery and over 700 top brands. Also get products from Amazon & Ebay via Kapruka Gloabal Shop into Sri Lanka.
Author
-
sdfsdf sdf sf sf sdf sf sdf
Author
PCoI on Easter Sunday attacks:
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC is not bound by recommendations made by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (P CoI) into the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, or presidential directives in that regard, according to authoritative sources.
They said that the AG couldn’t under any circumstances initiate legal proceedings until he had received the full PCoI report.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa received the PCoI report on Feb 1. The President’s Office delivered a set of PCoI reports to Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena on Feb 23, a day after the report was presented to the cabinet of ministers. The Island raised the matter with relevant authorities in the wake of a section of the media reporting the PCoI recommending punitive measures against former President Maithripala Sirisena, Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, IGP Pujitha Jayasundera, Chief of State Intelligence Senior DIG Nilantha Jayawardena, Chief of National Intelligence retired DIG Sisira Mendis and All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) leader and Samagi Jana Balavegaya MP Rishad Bathiudeen et al over the Easter Sunday carnage.
Sources pointed out that due to the inordinate delay in sharing the PCoI report with the AG, the department hadn’t been able to take preliminary measures required to initiate the proceedings. Sources said that a team of officers would take at least six weeks or more to examine the report before tangible measures could be taken.
With the AG scheduled to retire on May 24, 2021, even if the AG Department received the P CoI it would be quite a tough task to initiate proceedings ahead of retirement, sources said. However, in terms of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution enacted in last October, both the AG and the IGP could receive extensions beyond 60 at the President’s discretion.
Dappula de Livera received an Acting appointment as the AG a week after the Easter Sunday carnage whereas his predecessor Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, was elevated to Chief Justice.
Responding to another query, sources said that the Attorney General two weeks ago requested Secretary to the President for a copy of the P CoI. However, the AG was yet to receive one, sources said. In spite of the AG not receiving a P CoI copy, the AG had instructed the IGP to obtain a copy of the report when he requested the police to complete investigations into the Easter Sunday carnage. The AG issued specific instructions after having examined police files pertaining to the investigations.
The IGP, too, hadn’t received a copy so far though some sections of the report were in the public domain.
Agriculture Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage displayed at a live political programme on Derana a copy of the P CoI report he received at the cabinet meeting earlier in the day.
Sources said that the Attorney General’s Department couldn’t decide on a course of action in respect of the Easter carnage on the basis of a section of the report. In terms of the Commission of Inquiry Act (Section 24), the AG enjoyed significant powers/authority in respect of investigations; sources said adding that the Department urgently required both the P CoI report and police investigations report. The Attorney General’s Department has raised the delay in receiving a P CoI report amidst the Catholic Church attacking the government over the same issue.
Sources said that ministerial committee appointed to study the P CoI report couldn’t decide on how to proceed with the recommendations and the matter was entirely in the hands of the AG. Sources pointed out that the delay on the part of the government to release the report had received the attention of sections of the international media, including the New York Times. Public Security Minister retired Rear Admiral Sarath Weerasekera having met Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith at the Bishop’s House on Dec 8, 2020 said that the AG would get a copy of the P CoI report once the President received it. Minister Weerasekera said that the CID had handed over the relevant files after having completed investigations into eight blasts. Referring to the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) report on the Easter Sunday carnage, the former Navy Chief of Staff said that all such documents would have to be brought to one place and considered before initiating legal proceedings. Acknowledging that there could be delays, lawmaker Weerasekera said that on the instructions of the Attorney General a 12-member team of lawyers was working on the case. The minister vowed to expose the mastermind behind the Easter Sunday attacks. Investigations continued while some of those wanted were overseas, the minister said.
The minister acknowledged that the Attorney General couldn’t proceed without the P CoI report. Minister Weerasekera reiterated that once the President received the P CoI report, it would be sent to the Attorney General. The minister said that there were documents two to three feet high that needed scrutiny. The minister assured comprehensive investigation. The minister said that investigations pertaining to eight blasts had been completed and the reports handed over to the AG. However, the Attorney General had found shortcomings in those investigations.
Author
By Saman Indrajith
The Presidential Commission of Inquiry on the Easter Sunday bombings had failed to identify the mastermind of , the JVP said yesterday.
Addressing the media at the party headquarters in Pelawatte, JVP Propaganda Secretary MP Vijitha Herath said that the PCoI report had levelled accusations against former President Maithripala Sirisena, former IGP and head of intelligence for their dereliction of duty, shirking of responsibilities and not taking action to prevent the attacks and negligence. There were reference to the causes of the terror attacks and actions to be taken to avoid such attacks and the influence of extremist organisations. “However, there is no mention of the mastermind of the attacks, the handlers of the attackers and those whose interests the carnage served. It is also not mentioned whether there has been any foreign or local organisation behind those attacks. As per the PCoI report the attack took place as a result of culmination of extremism.
“According to the PCoI the extremist activities were a result of the prevailing political situation then. The entire nation was waiting to see who was responsible and who masterminded those attacks. The PCoI has failed to identify the true culprits responsible for the terror attacks. The report says that the leader of the suicide cadres killed himself in the attacks and it was a puzzle. That means those who are actually responsible for the attacks are still at large. The report does not provide exact details of the sources of the attacks. The PCoI had sittings for one year and five months. It summoned various persons and got their statements but it has failed to shed any light on the terror attacks. Everybody knows that the top leaders of the government and heads of security and intelligence establishments failed in their duties. Ranil Wickremesinghe was the second in command and he too is bound by the responsibility but the PCoI report fails to identify him as one of the persons against whom legal action should be instituted. The PCoI has treated Wickremesinghe and former President Maithripala Sirisena differently. We are not telling that this report is a total failure but we cannot accept this as a complete report. The PCoI handed over its report to the President on Feb 1. After 23 days it was sent to Parliament. Now, a copy of the report is there in the parliamentary library for the perusal of MPs.”
Herath said that the PCoI did not have powers to take punitive action. “It only has powers to name those responsible and recommend action to be taken against those named.
