Hemasiri blames tale carriers for souring of relations with Sirisena

By Rathindra Kuruwita

Former President Maithripala Sirisena had issued confusing instructions to officials following the Easter Sunday attacks, former Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando yesterday told the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) investigating the Easter Sunday attacks.

Fernando said that following the attacks, Sirisena had instructed him not to impose a curfew, but he had instructed the then IGP Pujith Jayasundara to do so.

“Immediately after the attacks, I contacted the President, who was out of the country. I wanted his permission to impose a curfew but he didn’t want that. But, later from news alerts I learnt that police curfew had been imposed throughout the country.”

Fernando said that he had had a cordial relationship with Sirisena until about January 2019, but it had turned sour gradually due to the actions of some individuals who gave wrong information about him to President Sirisena. That was deliberately done to create a rift between him and the president, he said.

The witness said that following the attack, former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and Defence State Minister Ruwan Wijewardene had called for a special security meeting and they had asked him and the Secretary to the President Udaya R. Seneviratne to take part.

However, after about half an hour from receiving the message, President Sirisena instructed both of them not to attend that meeting convened by the Premier.

Fernando also informed the commission that he had been the former Defence Secretary and not the Secretary appointed to handle the intelligence services in the country.

He made this statement responding to a question posed by the representative from the Attorney General’s (AG) department who led the evidence. The AG’s representative drew the witness’ attention to Article 52 (2) of the Constitution, which mentioned his duties as a Secretary.

The witness said that he had taken over as the Defence Secretary in November 2018 and the State Intelligence Service (SIS) had given him reports regarding Zahran Hashim and his extremist activities.

However, those reports had not mentioned that there was an immediate threat to the country, he said. They lacked analysis and never comprised recommendations. Fernando said that he expected analysis and recommendations in the reports from the country’s top intelligence agency.

“When I look at a report about a possible issue, I would want to know what we could do about them. But SIS reports always were vague. Even on April 20, the SIS Director only forwarded a WhatsApp message he had received from an Indian source. That’s the job for a postmaster. I lived two kilometres away from him; he could have sent a rider. Also he knew that I didn’t check WhatsApp messages often.”