The Attorney General is expected to request the appointment of a new Trial-at-Bar to hear witness testimonies in a case filed against the negligence of former Defence Secretary, Hemasiri Fernando, and former Inspector General of Police, Pujith Jayasundara in respect of the Easter Sunday terror attacks in 2019.
The AG’s decision was conveyed to the Permanent High Court-at-Bar in Colombo on Monday (28).
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) President’s Counsel Dileepa Peiris told court that the request would be made to the new Chief Justice, following the elevation of High Court Judge Aditya Patabedige, who previously chaired the three-judge panel, to the Court of Appeal. The resulting vacancy had necessitated the reconstitution of the bench, ASG Peiris said.
Fernando and Jayasundara stand accused of criminal negligence over their alleged failure to act on prior intelligence warnings and prevent the Easter Sunday suicide bombings carried out by Zharan Hashim and his extremist network.
ASG Peiris further noted that a written request had been made to the former Chief Justice on 8 March, 2025, but no favourable response had been received.
The case was taken up before Justices Dr. Namal Bandara Balalle and Mohamed Irshadeen of the two-member bench. Senior Counsel Roshan Dehiwala and Attorney-at-Law Nadesh Kumar, appearing for the accused, raised no objections to the request. Counsel for the aggrieved party also indicated consent.
Deputy Solicitor General Sudarshana de Silva joined ASG Peiris in representing the Attorney General.
In February 2022, the initial Trial-at-Bar acquitted both accused without calling for witness testimonies, after considering preliminary objections raised by the defence. That ruling was later appealed by the Attorney General.
A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court, delivering its decision on 5 November, 2024, overturned the acquittal and ordered a fresh trial, instructing the High Court to recall and examine witnesses. Four of the five justices agreed on the ruling, while the fifth delivered a separate opinion concurring with the final outcome.
By A. J. A. Abeynayake