On 28 July this year (2023), the publication of Sri Lanka: The Easter Sunday Massacre by Prof. Rohan Gunaratna sent shockwaves throughout the nation and beyond. As an internationally renowned expert who played a pivotal role in the investigations into the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks, his book was eagerly anticipated.
However, even before its release, the book was mired in controversy, with admirers praising his contributions while critics scrutinised his every move. Despite this, the book promised to reveal essential insights into the tragic events of 21 April 2019, and thus, drew significant attention.
The book launch event was attended by several high-ranking officials, including Speaker of the Parliament Mahinda Yapa Abeywardana, Foreign Affairs Minister President’s Counsel (PC) M.U.M. Ali Sabry, and retired Rear Admiral and incumbent Parliamentarian Dr. Sarath Weerasekera, among others. Notably, it was also graced by civilians who had been instrumental in reducing the impact of the Easter Sunday attacks, such as Mohamed Rasi Mohamed Thasleem Umair.
Ali Sabry’s speech during the launch focused on the importance of distinguishing between the acts of terrorists and the true image of Islam. He quoted various verses from the Quran to emphasise the peaceful nature of Islam and called for de-escalation, integration, and reconciliation to create lasting peace. Ali Sabry also highlighted the Government’s decision to delist five extremist groups, including the United Thowheeth Jama’ath, the Ceylon Thowheeth Jama’ath, the Sri Lanka Thowheeth Jama’ath, the All Ceylon Thowheeth Jama’ath, and the Jamiyathul Ansaari Sunnathul Mohomadiya, with the aim of rehabilitating and reintegrating them.
Explaining the reasons behind this decision, Ali Sabry stressed that failing to de-escalate these groups could lead to further radicalisation, drawing parallels to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which started with only 32 members but had over 12,000 ex-combatants rehabilitated after the war. He warned that without effective communication and the resolution of differences, radicalisation’s impact could become even more severe.
In a dramatic opening, Prof. Gunaratna played a hitherto unreleased video of Zahran Hashim, the suicide bomber responsible for the Shangri-La Hotel attack in Colombo and the Leader of the National Thowheeth Jama’ath. In the video, Hashim called for violence, incited racism, and advocated for targeting Christians, openly promoting genocide and the creation of a caliphate in Sri Lanka. His speech sought to unite Muslims in violence, a plot that was thankfully foiled and rejected.
Prof. Gunaratna delved into the factors of radicalisation that led Hashim towards his nefarious goal, revealing that both Hashim and the alleged mastermind behind the Easter Sunday attacks, Naufer Moulavi, were heavily influenced by an Indian preacher known as P. Jainulabideen or “PJ”. He stressed the necessity of continuing to ban radical preachers like PJ and called for a rehabilitation mechanism similar to that of Singapore, expressing disappointment in Sri Lanka’s lack of an effective programme.
Moreover, Prof. Gunaratna advocated for establishing a committee on religious harmony where religious leaders from different faiths could come together to discuss religious differences and promote interreligious harmony.
In his bold statements, Prof. Gunaratna claimed that the Easter Sunday attacks were not a result of an intelligence-related failure, as the Government had been presented with 337 intelligence reports. Instead, he argued that they were a failure to implement the necessary measures, pointing out a statement from politician Azath Salley in 2017, wherein Salley had called for the arrest of Hashim due to his radical extremist activities, but that the Government had not acted upon it.
Prior to the event, some critics raised concerns about the content included in the invitation. In an article titled “Sri Lanka’s Easter Sunday Massacre: The Distortions in the Invitation Card” in the Colombo Telegraph, Mass L. Usuf raised five points of contention, addressing Prof. Gunaratna’s claims and raising questions before the expert.
Usuf questioned Prof. Gunaratna’s assertion that the Easter Sunday attacks were the world’s worst international terrorist carnage after al-Qaeda’s 11 September 2001 attacks. He cited the “Mai Kadra massacre” in Ethiopia’s Tigray region, which resulted in 766 deaths, the “Christmas massacre” by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the killing of about 865 civilians and abduction of around 160 children, and the “Makombo massacre” in the DRC in 2009, which saw 321 people killed.
To this, Prof. Gunaratna responded: “The ‘Mai Kadra massacre’, the LRA ‘Christmas massacre’, and the ‘Makombo massacre’ are not acts of international terrorism. The Easter Sunday attacks were an act of international terrorism. Usuf does not understand the difference. He has no expertise.”
Regarding Prof. Gunaratna’s claim that religiously motivated violence has its genesis in Salafi jihadism, Usuf mentioned the Sikh Khalistan movement’s terror attack on an Air India flight in 1985, killing 329 people, and the actions of the LRA as instances of Sikh and Christian extremism, respectively. In response, Prof. Gunaratna explained: “Religiously motivated violence is not only by Muslim groups but by the distortion of concepts of all religions. Salafi jihadism is the main ideology driving Muslim terrorism. He should refer to any global terrorism database as over 80% of violence is by Muslim groups including by the Salafi jihad ideology that has its roots in Salafi Wahhabism.”
Usuf’s third point addressed Prof. Gunaratna’s question on making religious leaders accountable when they promote exclusivist and extremist ideologies. Usuf argued that religious leaders had been at the forefront of promoting coexistence, tolerance, and unity, and thus, such a question was uncalled for. In reply, Prof. Gunaratna clarified that his question did not single out Muslim religious leaders but sought to address the accountability of religious leaders across the spectrum, emphasising that Muslim clerics provided leadership to the Easter Sunday attacks’ perpetrators.
The fourth point raised by Usuf questioned Prof. Gunaratna’s inquiry about radical clerics campaigning to lift the ban on extremist publications, foreign preachers, and listed entities. Usuf sought clarification on who these radical clerics were. Prof. Gunaratna retorted that Muslim leaders should not allow foreign ideologies, radical preachers, and hate publications to re-enter Sri Lanka, with the Easter Sunday attacks serving as a cautionary guide to reform the Muslim religious space.
The fifth point that Usuf chose to address was what he claimed was the most dangerous statement in the invitation: “Should we wait to suffer the next attack or urgently shape all our religious spaces, a sacred treasure, to prevent an attack in the making?”. Usuf claims that the statement sounded prophetic and appeared to predict a false flag attack to put the blame on the Muslim community and its religious leaders.
Prof. Gunaratna replied: “When incumbent Justice, Prisons Affairs, and Constitutional Reforms Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe PC informed that 32 Sri Lankan Muslims went to Syria to join the Islamic State (IS), and explained the threat to Sri Lanka, the same group of Muslim apologists and supporters criticised him. These apologists and supporters who continue to parade conspiracy theories should be investigated. They believe that al-Qaeda, the IS, and other groups of religious fanatics are agents of the US, Israel, and India.”
In conclusion, the book launch provided an opportunity to address sensitive questions pertaining to rights and fears. It was a vantage point for the debate on the sustenance of national security or the prevalence of unchecked religious freedoms. Nevertheless, the State is expected to maintain an adequate balance between the rights accorded to its people and the due protection of the nation. I believe that the book provides abundant information on how the Easter Sunday attacks transpired, to help us comprehend what measures the State must adopt in order to strike the right balance.
(The writer is a legal researcher. He can be contacted at faizer@live.com)
………………………………
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect those of this publication.