199th Day of the Main Easter Attack Trial – HC (TAB) 2972/21
Date: 03rd June 2026|
Venue: Special Permanent Three-Judge High Court (Trial-at-Bar), 2nd Floor, MCC Building, Adhikarana Mawatha, Colombo 12.
At the commencement of the proceedings, the learned Trial-at-Bar directed the Registrar of the Negombo Magistrate’s Court to produce Production No. H612/19, which had been marked in Case No. L95839/19.
Thereafter, PW-1400 was called to testify, and prior to the commencement of his evidence, the Court ordered that the identity and name of the witness shall not be disclosed by any party or the media.
PW-1400 stated that he had participated in several programmes conducted by Zahran Hashim and others. He stated that after completing his G.C.E. Ordinary Level Examination in 2012, he attended a five-day Youth Empowerment Programme conducted by the Student Movement of the Sri Lanka Jamaat-e-Islami organisation, which mainly focused on Islamic religious teachings. He thereafter obtained membership in the organisation through its Ulapane branch and later joined the Jamiya Naleemiya Institute of Higher Education. The witness stated that in December 2012, the Sri Lanka Islamic Students’ Organisation conducted a two-day programme at Alivadiya, Puttalam District, for students of Jamiya Naleemiya, and that the 4th Accused brought an HRDP team and arranged physical training, with two such programmes being conducted at the same venue.
The witness further stated that in 2016 he travelled with the 4th Accused, Gampola Hanan and Mawanella Hamidi to Beruwala to meet a person named Ahmad Thalik Luqman, who communicated in English and Arabic, and that discussions took place regarding the use of equipment against persons considered to be acting against Islam. He further stated that in 2016 a programme was conducted at Thoppur, Sammanthurai, attended by the 4th Accused, Mawanella Hamidi, Gampola Hanan and others, and that the 9th Accused attended and instructed participants on the use of a T-56 firearm. The witness stated that in 2018 a two-day programme was held at Shanthipura, Nuwara Eliya, attended by approximately twenty to twenty-five persons, including the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th and 15th Accused, Zahran Hashim and others. He stated that participants were assigned “Abu” names similar to ISIS-style naming, and that the programme contained both ideological and practical components. He stated that the ideological component focused on establishing an Islamic State and included teachings on jihad, and that an ISIS flag was displayed. He further stated that participants were divided into two groups, one designated as suicide bombers and the other for armed combat, and that he himself was placed in the suicide bomber group. He stated that “Abu Shila” (identified as the 3rd Accused) was responsible for weapons-related matters, and that “Abu Umar” referred to the 4th Accused. He stated that mobile phones were prohibited, that videos were shown depicting executions and mutilation of perceived enemies, that he performed security duty during the programme, and that no police officers were present.
The witness further stated that another programme was held in Hambantota in 2018 at a guest house similar to the Shanthipura programme, and that it was discontinued after an explosion incident involving a person known as “Abu Kinal”, a brother of Zahran Hashim, during an explosives experiment. He stated that participants left in a van which contained T-56 firearms and pistols. He further stated that after the programme he was given sulphur powder by the 5th Accused, which he initially stored but later returned due to fear, and that it was subsequently handed over to a person named Fousan in Mawanella, who in return provided a T-56 firearm. He stated that the 5th and 9th Accused later fired the weapon into a river.
The witness further stated that another programme was held at the residence of Abdean in Mawanella, where books and documents were distributed for translation work involving the 1st, 9th and 14th Accused, Zahran Hashim, Saini and himself. He stated that a translation committee later met at the residence of the 1st Accused at Kekunagolla to prepare a Madrasa syllabus, but that the project could not proceed due to disagreements. He further stated that in November 2018 he participated in a programme in Delgoda, Mawanella conducted by the 4th and 5th Accused for students who had completed their G.C.E. Ordinary Level Examination, and that he also served as a resource person.
The witness further stated that on 26 December 2018 the destruction of Buddhist statues in Mawanella took place, and that he later became aware he was a suspect in relation to the incident. He stated that he gave a statement to the Kegalle Police but initially did not disclose all relevant facts, and that he later provided full statements to the CID and TID.
The prosecution thereafter produced a pen drive marked P-163. A video marked P-163(A) showed the flag used by Zahran Hashim at the Nuwara Eliya programme, and another video marked P-163(B) showed Zahran Hashim with masked individuals making a pledge. A compact disc marked P3(50), along with production P56-2(2) and photographs marked P56-2(a) and P56-2(a)(1), were also shown to the witness and identified.
During cross-examination, the 1st Accused suggested that he had not preached or encouraged violence during any programme, which the witness accepted. The 2nd Accused suggested that the witness had not met him at the Shanthipura programme, which the witness denied, and further suggested that the witness was lying, which was also denied. The 3rd Accused suggested that “Abu names” were not mentioned in the initial police statement of 13 January 2019, which the witness admitted, and further suggested inconsistencies in later statements regarding “Abushila”, T-56 training and related matters, which the witness either denied or stated he could not remember. It was further suggested that the witness had been influenced by CID, that he had not been arrested in relation to the Mawanella statue incident, and that he had been promised state witness status, all of which were denied.
The 4th Accused suggested inconsistencies in the number of participants at the Shanthipura programme, ranging from 15, 20 to 25 persons, which the witness responded to as “may be so” or confirmed depending on reference, and further suggested that he had never participated in the programme, that his statements were made under CID guidance, and that he was promised protection or witness status, all of which were denied. The witness confirmed that he was aware of case numbers through CID but otherwise denied the allegations and declined to answer questions regarding witness protection.
The proceedings continued until 10.00 p.m., whereupon the 4th Accused requested additional time to continue cross- examination. The Court accordingly adjourned the matter and fixed it for continuation of cross-examination at 1.00 p.m. on the following day.
