A majority of the three-judge High Court Trial-at-Bar in Colombo has found former Inspector General of Police (IGP) Pujith Jayasundara guilty of failing to prevent the 2019 Easter Sunday terrorist attacks despite receiving prior intelligence warnings. He was convicted of neglect of duty and aiding murder, and was sentenced to death.
The case was heard before a three-judge bench comprising Priyantha Liyanage, Viraj Weerasuriya, and Thilakaratne Bandara.
Delivering the majority verdict, Judges Priyantha Liyanage and Thilakaratne Bandara ruled that Jayasundara was guilty on the charges.
Reading the majority decision, Presiding Judge Priyantha Liyanage said that although intelligence had been received in advance warning of suicide attacks on Catholic churches and tourist hotels in Colombo and nearby areas on Easter Sunday, no action had been taken to prevent them.
The court noted that 268 people were killed and 586 others were injured in the attacks. It stated that, as the country’s IGP at the time, Jayasundara was responsible for protecting the public and ensuring national security.
The judges said that on the evening of 20 April 2019, then Director of the State Intelligence Service Nilantha Jayawardena had informed Jayasundara of intelligence indicating that suicide bomb attacks were being planned for the following day. However, the court found that he failed to take any action to prevent the attacks and neglected his official duties.
Considering the seriousness of the offence, the majority judges imposed the death sentence.
However, Judge Viraj Weerasuriya, in his dissenting judgment, ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt and said Jayasundara should be acquitted.
Meanwhile, the verdict in the case against former Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, who faces charges over the same incident, is expected to be delivered separately.
The case was first heard before a three-judge High Court Trial-at-Bar in 2022. At that time, both accused were acquitted. However, following an appeal by the Attorney General, the Supreme Court ordered that the defence evidence be heard again, leading to the retrial that resulted in the present judgment.