State Intelligence Service Chief says intelligence on terror attacks received on April 8th

by Staff Writer 29-05-2019 | 10:25 PM
Colombo (News 1st): The Parliament Select Committee to probe into the 04/21 attacks convened for the first time today (May 29). Professor Jayampathy Wickramarathna filled in as chair of the meeting as the Committee Chairman as Deputy Speaker Ananda Kumarasiri was unable to attend today's meeting. Dr Rajitha Senaratne and M.A. Sumanthiran were also absent for today's session. Ravi Karunanayake, Dr Nalinda Jayatissa, Rauff Hakeem, Prof. Ashu Marasinghe and Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka were present at today's meeting. The meeting was open to the media and Secretary to the Ministry of Defense Retired General Shantha Kottegoda and National Intelligence Head Sisira Mendis testified before the commission today. Former Deputy Inspector General Head of State Intelligence Sisira Mendis noted that according to his knowledge Zahran's name came up in March 2017 after a clash between two Muslim groups in Kattakudy. He believes the Terrorist Investigation Division had acted on this and had warrants to make an arrest. He noted that the Head of that division at the time was DIG Nalaka de Silva. Ravi Karunanayake questioned Sisira Mendis as to when they met before the 21st. Responding to this Mendis noted that they met on April 9th for a discussion. He went onto question regarding the intel they received from India on 4th or the 6th. Mendis noted that he personally doesn't know to say where the intel came from and up to now the Director of the State Intelligence Service has also not informed him where this information came from. He added that the director is the one who sent him the letter, which was sent addressed to his (Mendis) name saying 'Information of Alleged Planned Attack'. He went onto note that there are only two lines, one is information about the attack and second is that it is forwarded to him. Mendis said the date mentioned is April 4th 2019, a Sunday. He added that he opened it at about 11 am on the 8th and had arrived to work at about 9.45 am because India's Secretary of Defence was due to arrive that day. Mendis stated the 8th was a very busy day and even though he wanted to inform Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, he was busy with the Indian Defence Secretary. He noted that he mentioned regarding this verbally at around 3 pm noting that the police must act on this. He added that he wanted to send this to the IGP. He added that the Defence Secretary said that they will take it up on the 9th, however, nothing was mentioned about this on the 9th. He noted that it was not the main topic of the Intelligence Co-ordination meeting on the 9th. Speaking to the committee Mendis noted that when he spoke about this with the Director of State Intelligence Jayawardena, he said that such information has surfaced and that the Police Chief had been notified. Mendis noted his decision was to write everything about this to the Police Chief on behalf of the Secretary of Defence and to sign it off as top priority. He noted that it was sent on the 9th itself. When questioned if the IGP spoke to him about the seriousness of this at a closer date, Mendis noted that he did not. He went onto note that another security council meeting was not held again until after the attacks. The current Secretary to the Ministry of Defence testified before the Committee and explained the current defence situation in the country.
General (Ret) Shantha Kottegoda: We had removed 99% of the threat. This is not something we can finish off in 2 or 3 months. What we have done is short term. Next we have the medium and the long term to think about it. We can't arrest those who were involved and leave them in detention camps and control this radicalization. We are looking for more places. Min. Ravi Karunanyake: One person's name comes up. That is Abdul Razik. It has been a number of years and some allege that these people are not arrested as they are given some sort of protection. General (Ret) Shantha Kottegoda: The IGP has said that he is looking into it but that there is not sufficient evidence to make an arrest.