By Leonard Pinto –

The query into the Easter Sunday bombing of 2019 is remarkable, because in a country where impunity was the way of life, the case had persisted for seven (7) years. Besides, its content forms the very heart of the consciousness and the conscience of the society, as well as that of the individual i.e. Truth and Justice (Sathya–Sadaranaya). The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) says that according to the evidence gathered, there is a prima facie case to proceed with the conspiracy theory that goes beyond Zahran. In the attack of two Catholic churches (excluding hotels), 195 of its members were killed and it too alludes to the conspiracy theory. The retired Major General Suresh Salley, the former chief of Sri Lanka’s State Intelligence Services (SIS) is in custody for “aiding and abetting” under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) in the Easter Sunday bombing.

The evidence that supports the conspiracy theory include (1) Salley met Zahran Hashim of NTJ, the leader of the bombing group with his brother Sainy Moulavi in February 2018 at Vanaththavillu, near Puttalam, organised by Azad Maulana. (2) On the day of bombing in 2019 Maulana received a call from Salley asking him to meet Latheef Jameel at Taj Samudra and pick him and his phone. Jameel could not detonate his bomb and was seen on CCTV at Taj Samudra calling someone for instruction. (3) US FBI traced a secret number regularly used for communication between the military intelligence and Zahran’s NTJ. (4) Military intelligence officers visited the house of one suicide bomber just before the attack but did not share this information with Police. (5) Six months before the Easter attack, military intelligence officers wilfully misled the police on the killing of 2 police constables by Zahran’s group and put the blame on LTTE. (6) There were reports on the release of a bomb laden truck at Kelani Bridge on the instructions of a higher up. (7) Zahran’s NTJ and an ISIS member visited the two churches, 3 weeks before bombing with the knowledge of Salley. (8) The father of a MP pre-empted the church bombing and advised his son not to go for Easter Sunday mass. (9) Indian intelligence agencies provided precise and repeated warnings to Sri Lankan authorities on the attack from 4 to 21 April 2019. (10) Immediately after the new president was elected, DIG Ravi Seneviratne and Director of CID Shani Abeysekera, who were investigating the Easter Sunday Bombing were demoted and transferred, preventing investigations. (11) Twenty two (22) CID officers, who were involved in the investigations were removed and a travel ban was imposed on a large number of officers, (12). There was a party in a hotel in the south to celebrate the success of the bombing, organised by Salley and (13) Salley refuses to provide the password to his mobile and laptop to the investigators, citing there is classified information, although the war is over.

On the other hand, Mr Udaya Gammanpila of the Pivithuru Hela Urumaya (PHU) believes that there is no Maha Mola Karaya beyond Zahran Hassim, the fanatical jihadist leader of NTJ, who with his band of suicide bombers may have hoped for eternal life for their martyrdom and 72 virgins in paradise as in the teachings of the Islamic Hadith. He further states that FBI, AFP and Scotland Yard of USA, Australia and UK respectively testified to this, when they were not mandated to inquire into the internal politics of Easter Sunday Bombing, but only the fate of their citizens and any ISIS connections.

One can find three main reasons as the foundation of Mr Gammanpila’s theory. They are; (1) Having lost the election, he wants to make a comeback by popular means (i.e. book, demonstrations and fasting. (2) He has personal interests in being Salley’s lawyer, which the court had rejected, because of his unprofessional conduct outside the courts. (3) the policies of his heritage party, PHU and the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) are aligned with the view that no matter what they have done, the members of the Sri Lankan forces are war heroes and should not be punished even if they had committed crimes. This has been the moot point between Sri Lanka and Geneva on human rights violations.

The ethics on the policies of PHU and JHU as demonstrated by Mr Gammanpila’s actions and followed by Mr Wimal Weerawansa of Jathika Nidahas Peramuna (JNP) have two major flaws. First Error is in the denial of the rights of every citizen by giving priority to the majority over the minority. It is the same flawed policies of a nationalist SLFP party in the 1950s that focussed on ‘ethnicity and religion’ over the ‘rights of Sri Lankan citizens’, which laid the foundation to the 26-year war that claimed the lives of 80,000 to 100,000 Sri Lankan citizens. Unfortunately, clause 9 of the current Sri Lankan constitution which states, “The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana, while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14(1)(e)” contradicts itself and the ‘rights of Sri Lankan citizen,’ is given a secondary place.

PHU, JHU and JNP are trying to saw the same seeds of division for another potential conflict and chaos. This erroneous thinking is derived from the belief in the Mahawansa story on the origins of the noble Sinhalese race from a lion, and Buddha’s request from god Sakkara to protect Vijaya and bequeathing Sri Lanka to Buddhist Sinhalese. This forms the consciousness of all heritage parties. No educated Buddhist Sinhalese of today would take seriously the legends, myths and folklore in ancient writings as absolute truth or dogma, although they have a heuristic value. In interpreting ancient writings, exegesis (i.e. author’s intent and meaning of the text at the time of writing) and hermeneutics (i.e. relevant meaning of the text today) are important, if they are to be applied validly to modern society. Those who adhere to PHU, JHU and JNP policies in this regard are politicising the religion and making a mockery of the noble Buddhist philosophy. The second ethical error in their policies is in that the crimes of those who had done a great service to the country must not be treated as crimes, and must be forgotten.

Some adherents to heritage party policies also believe that the last Sinhalese King, (though an Indian and a Hindu-Buddhist) had the right to do what he wanted, as he had authority over all his subjects, and was mandated by Mahawansa chronicles to protect the Buddhist Sinhalese nation. Therefore, any crimes or human right violations by those who liberated the country from the Tamils must be absolved and decorated as achievements of the Buddhist Sinhalese. In this context, death of 195 Catholics is insignificant before the liberation of the nation. Some opposition politicians believe that by protecting Salley, they are protecting Buddhism and the Sinhalese nation as demonstrated by the rituals performed in temples and the involvement of monks in support of Salley. In their ethics, they had mixed up two issues. (1) Defeat of separatists and unification of the nation, and (2) Use military power to kill 269 in view of a political campaign.

There are two interesting stories from fiction and non-fiction that demonstrate the ethical error of this line of thinking on national interest above the law and king’s limitless rights. The protagonist in the Crime and Punishment of Fyodor Dostoevsky (1866), the double murderer Raskolnikov invents a theory that “extraordinary” men are above moral laws and are justified in committing crimes for a higher purpose. Raskolnikov believes “intelligence” will allow him to bypass his conscience after the murder. However, Dostoevsky believes that a person cannot escape his own conscience and Raskolnikov’s conscience is rehabilitated after going through sufferings in Siberian prison camp.

The same ethic comes up in another way in non-fiction, in the life of King David (1011 – 971 BC), the founder of the Kingdom of Israel. When David saw from his roof top the beautiful Bathsheba bathing, he got her down to the palace and slept with her. Later, when Bathsheba told David that she was pregnant, he requested Uriah the husband of Bathsheba who was fighting the Ammonites at Rabbah to come home and sleep with her to cover up the issue. As he refused to go to his wife and went back to the battle field, David advised Joab the commander of the army to send Uriah to the front where the battle was intense, and Uriah was killed. Then Nathan the advisor to the king rebuked David for his crime with a story. Accordingly, a rich man had many sheep and a poor man had only one sheep. When the friends of the rich man visited him, he got his servants to kill the sheep of the poor man, and had a party for his friends. Hearing the story, King David was indignant and wanted to punish this rich man. When Nathan told him that the rich man was he, David publicly repented on streets, putting on sack clothes and ashes, as he accepted his guilt in his conscience and asked for Lord’s mercy (II Samuel 11-13). This historical event demonstrates that even the king cannot misuse his authority and commit crimes on the subjects.

Currently Sri Lanka is at the threshold of a paradigm-shift in the ethical system from omission and commission to law and order, duty and responsibility. Naturally those of the old paradigm find it difficult to accept the tenets of the new paradigm. On the face of the current political gymnastics on streets and temples, the good hearted, simple, sympathetic and compassionate Sri Lankan public is driven to confusion under the cover of protecting Buddhism. If fasting unto death becomes the way of dispensing law and justice in Sri Lanka, then our Courts and Police would become redundant. Perhaps, it is time to reflect and meditate on Buddha’s sermon on Kalama Sutta, his charter on free-inquiry based on evidence, a great piece of scientific philosophy for all times.