{"id":155899,"date":"2026-04-25T15:55:00","date_gmt":"2026-04-25T22:55:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=155899"},"modified":"2026-04-25T15:55:00","modified_gmt":"2026-04-25T22:55:00","slug":"sri-lankas-cardinal-questions-why-were-churches-targeted-the-facts-answered","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2026\/04\/25\/sri-lankas-cardinal-questions-why-were-churches-targeted-the-facts-answered\/","title":{"rendered":"Sri Lanka\u2019s Cardinal Questions: Why were Churches targeted? \u2014 The Facts Answered"},"content":{"rendered":"

Shenali D Waduge<\/span><\/b><\/em><\/span><\/b><\/h2>\n\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The Cardinal has publicly expressed uncertainty as to why churches were targeted in the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks. However, this is not an unresolved mystery in terms of established findings. Multiple investigations \u2014 including international intelligence assessments, the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI), Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC), Supreme Court observations, and other formal reviews \u2014 have already examined the matter in detail.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Established facts are clear<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    The Easter Sunday attacks were carried out by a structured extremist network led by Zahran Hashim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Across all investigative findings, a consistent pattern emerged:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \n
    • progressive ideological religious radicalisation<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • formation of an organised extremist network<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • training, logistics, safe houses, and coordination mechanisms<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • prior intelligence warnings received by state agencies<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • inaction on the warnings to prevent attacks<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • coordinated suicide attacks on churches and hotels<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

      The selection of churches was not random.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Globally, extremist movements have repeatedly targeted places of worship due to their symbolic, psychological, and ideological impact. Egypt, Nigeria, Congo are the latest examples.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      This fits a known operational logic: attacking symbolic civilian targets to maximise fear, visibility, and ideological messaging.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Established sequence:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      radicalisation \u2192 organisation \u2192 preparation \u2192 intelligence awareness \u2192 security failure \u2192 execution<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      This chain is consistently reflected across investigative findings and has not been replaced or disproved by any official inquiry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n
      1. The emerging new narrative\u201d and arrests<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

        A newer narrative has emerged in public discourse that does not dispute the existence of Zahran Hashim\u2019s extremist network, but instead suggests that external actors have influenced, enabled, or shaped the outcome for a political objective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        This version strives to make the external actor the driving force of the outcome and not the religious ideological objective that drove the extremists to their goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        This creates a major shift in how the events are being explained.
        It moves away from the established view that the attacks were driven by extremist ideology, and instead suggests they were mainly caused by outside influence and not for religious martyrdom.

        This raises concerns about discussing intelligence matters publicly, especially when claims are made without clear evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        When officers who have served the nation are subjected to arrest or public allegation without clearly established evidence, it can have a wider institutional impact. It risks creating a climate of caution within the services, where personnel may become more risk-averse in their operational decision-making, which can in turn affect overall operational effectiveness and, by extension, national security and public safety.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Some versions of this new narrative further imply that selective individuals within state structures played roles in facilitation or coordination of the Easter attacks itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        However, this poses immediate evidentiary and logical challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \n
        • No verified primary evidence has been produced that establishes such operational linkage despite claim in October 2021.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Many claims emerge years after the event through secondary commentary or retrospective interpretation<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Investigative standards require that allegations must be supported by substantiated material before conclusions are drawn<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • The burden of proof lies first with those making claim, not retrospectively on investigative institutions tasked to find the evidence, raising concerns that investigations may be moving toward finding evidence for claims, rather than testing claims against existing<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
            \n
          1. Timeline and operational logic do not support external control<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

            Key individuals referenced in newer narratives were not in operational command roles during critical phases, and in some instances were not present in the country during relevant periods.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Maj. Gen. Suresh Sallay was arrested and held under CID detention under a 90-day detention order issued under the PTA.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Public commentary surrounding the new narrative has also indicated the possibility of further arrests, with narratives already beginning to build around certain individuals, creating an expectation that they may be targeted for arrest next.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            This raises a fundamental question:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            How can a locally embedded, ideologically driven extremist network be externally engineered\u201d without embedded operational presence, command access, or sustained ideological infiltration?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Radicalisation is not a remote event.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            It is a long-term internal process based on ideology, trust networks, and sustained indoctrination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Suicide coordination requires deep internal conviction \u2014 not external instruction without embedded control.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            No established counter-terrorism framework supports the claim of externally directing a fully formed suicide network without ideological penetration or operational command presence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              \n
            1. Political outcome theories lack evidentiary grounding<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

              Another strand of the narrative links the attacks to subsequent political transitions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              However, this interpretation does not align with the political realities of the period:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                \n
              • Likely electoral and governance changes were visible prior to April 2019.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Public sentiment and political momentum were already changing.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Institutional instability and governance controversies were shaping political outcomes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • February 2018 local government results \/ Central Bank Bond Scam \/ corruptions and mismanagement cases a few examples.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
                  \n
                1. What the new narrative is attempting to do<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                  The emerging narrative is not a simple alternative interpretation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  It is a structured reframing of an already established investigative record.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  The Actors in the new narrative<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  Advanced through a convergence of different groups with shared hostility:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    \n
                  • selective interpreters of the official record<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • narrative expanders who elevate unverified claims<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • political commentators linking events to governance narratives<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • emotive amplifiers circulating emotionally charged interpretations<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • silent endorsers who reinforce repetition without verification<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                    These actors may not coordinate, but they converge on a shared interpretive direction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    The emotive driver: capture through shared hostility<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    A significant sustaining force of this narrative is emotive capture<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    A recurring undercurrent is shared political hostility toward a particular political leadership and its associated governance period, which appears to be the origins of the new narrative and the reason for its continued persistence and amplification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    This produces three effects:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \n
                    • lowers evidentiary thresholds in favor of accepting speculative claims<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • allows retrospective attribution of systemic failures to personalised political narratives<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • it substitutes emotional alignment for factual verification in parts of public discourse<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                      In this environment, acceptance of claims is often shaped less by evidence and more by pre-existing political sentiment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      How the narrative is being sustained<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      The narrative persists through method rather than proof:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        \n
                      • selective use of unverified statements as quasi-evidence<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • reinterpretation of known intelligence gaps as proof of hidden orchestration<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • sensationalized narrative repetition across digital and commentary platforms until assertion gains perceived legitimacy through repetition<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • relying on emotional interpretation instead of established investigative findings, while at the same time asking investigators to prove claims that were not originally supported by evidence<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                        Over time, this creates a parallel interpretive layer that competes with and even replaces, the established investigative record.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        A further concern is the selective direction of scrutiny.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        While new theories are being promoted, far less attention is being given to the documented fact that multiple individuals within the security and intelligence structure were already aware of Zahran Hashim\u2019s extremist activities well before April 2019, and that he remained at large despite being a known figure and, at times, a fugitive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        If accountability is the objective, then this raises a fundamental question:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \n
                        • why is there less focus on those who had prior knowledge and the authority to act, but failed to prevent the attacks?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                          Shifting attention toward unproven new theories, while established lines of responsibility remain insufficiently examined, risks diverting focus away from the factual record and the core issue of prevention failure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Additional concerns arise regarding consistency and credibility in the investigative process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Individuals who were previously subject to findings of negligence and removed from their roles are now again involved in investigative functions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          At the same time, scrutiny appears to be directed toward individuals who were not in command positions during the relevant period, or who had taken some level of action based on available intelligence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          This creates a perception of inconsistency in how responsibility is being assessed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          When lines of accountability appear unevenly applied, and when public narratives begin to focus on selective individuals rather than the full chain of responsibility, it risks shifting attention away from the broader institutional failures that have already been identified in formal investigations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                            \n
                          1. Core contradiction with established findings<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                            The established record consistently confirms:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              \n
                            • ideological religious radicalisation within a structured extremist network<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                            • operational planning and coordination led by Zahran Hashim<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                            • documented intelligence warnings prior to the attacks<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                            • systemic security failures in prevention and coordination<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                              The emerging narrative introduces a different causal model:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                \n
                              • external orchestration as primary driver<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                              • operational influence without documented command presence<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                              • replacement of ideological causation with political attribution<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                These frameworks cannot simultaneously function as primary explanations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                Because:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                  \n
                                • radicalisation is internally developed and ideologically sustained<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                • suicide operations require embedded indoctrination and organisational control<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                • no investigative finding replaces ideological causation with external operational command<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                  Therefore, the contradiction is structural, not interpretive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                    \n
                                  1. The analytical tension<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                                    The durability of the new narrative does not stem from evidentiary strength, but from the convergence of:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      \n
                                    • emotional alignment<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                    • selective interpretation of gaps<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                    • retrospective causal reconstruction<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                    • political agendas and a gradual shifting of accountability<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                      It does not disprove the established chain of radicalisation and execution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      It overlays an alternative causation model without dismantling the evidentiary foundation already established through multiple investigations without dismantling the evidentiary foundation already established, while shifting focus toward selected individuals rather than those who held responsibility during the period of the attacks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      This is not a rejection of inquiry, debate or discussions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      Legitimate questions must be asked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      But inquiry must remain anchored in evidence, not reconstructed through selective interpretation and emotional convergence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      The victims of the Easter Sunday attacks deserve justice based on verified facts, not interpretations shaped by retrospective political framing while disregarding the established extremist threat that existed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      Accountability must be built on evidence \u2014 not narrative alignment or political agendas. When established findings are selectively reinterpreted, the result is not clarity, but distortion of the investigative record.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      Truth does not emerge from repetition or shared hostility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      Truth emerges from evidence \u2014 consistently applied, without bias, selective interpretation and without deviation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      We have full faith in the Courts and the Judiciary to distinguish fact from fiction and to ensure truth is not diverted or diluted by the new narratives that attempt to manipulate the truth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      Shenali D Waduge<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                      Shenali D Waduge The Cardinal has publicly expressed uncertainty as to why churches were targeted in the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks. However, this is not an unresolved mystery in terms of established findings. Multiple investigations \u2014 including international intelligence assessments, the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI), Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC), Supreme Court observations, and other […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[47],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-155899","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-shenali-waduge"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155899","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=155899"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155899\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":155900,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155899\/revisions\/155900"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=155899"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=155899"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=155899"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}