Seven years after coordinated attacks on churches and hotels, a landmark verdict brings lengthy prison terms while wider questions over intelligence failures and responsibility remain.
A Sri Lankan court has convicted 15 men for their roles in the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings, bringing one of the country’s largest terrorism trials to a conclusion more than seven years after suicide attackers struck Christian worshippers and hotel guests across the island.
The Colombo High Court Trial-at-Bar delivered its verdict on September 22 after proceedings lasting nearly five years. Nine other defendants were acquitted. The 15 convicted men received sentences ranging from 200 to 260 years of rigorous imprisonment, effectively ensuring that they will remain incarcerated for life, while the court also ordered the confiscation of their property.
The judgment concerns the coordinated attacks of April 21, 2019, when suicide bombers targeted three churches and three luxury hotels as Christians celebrated Easter Sunday. More than 260 people were killed and hundreds wounded, making the bombings one of the deadliest episodes of violence in Sri Lanka since the end of its civil war in 2009.
A case of extraordinary scale
The prosecution had brought 23,270 charges against the defendants, including murder, conspiracy to commit terrorism, aiding and abetting the attacks, and offences involving firearms and explosives under Sri Lanka’s Prevention of Terrorism Act.
According to Sri Lanka’s News First, 2,309 witnesses testified for the prosecution during the trial. Twenty-five men were originally charged, although one died in custody before proceedings were completed.
Among those convicted was Mohamed Naufar Maulavi, whom prosecutors identified as a central figure involved in organising and supporting the group responsible for the attacks.
The bombers themselves died in the explosions. Investigators have attributed the attacks to local Islamist extremist networks inspired by the Islamic State group. The distinction is significant in a country where Muslims constitute a minority and where religious leaders repeatedly warned after the bombings against treating an entire religious community as responsible for the crimes of extremists.
Churches were deliberately targeted
The attacks struck St. Anthony’s Shrine in Colombo, St. Sebastian’s Church in Negombo and Zion Church in Batticaloa, alongside the Shangri-La, Cinnamon Grand and Kingsbury hotels.
Two of the churches were Catholic and one was Protestant. Families had gathered for Easter services when the explosions occurred, turning Christianity’s celebration of the resurrection into one of the darkest days in the recent history of Sri Lankan Christianity.
The scale of the killings gave the case particular importance for the country’s Catholic community. Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith, Archbishop of Colombo, and other Church representatives have spent years demanding what they describe as the full truth behind the attacks, while organising commemorations, demonstrations and prayer gatherings for the victims.
Following the verdict, Catholic priest Jude Fernando told AFP, in comments reported by several international outlets, that the Church welcomed the convictions after a lengthy wait for justice.
But the verdict does not necessarily close the broader controversy surrounding the bombings.
Convictions do not end questions over the attacks
The Catholic Church in Sri Lanka has repeatedly argued that investigators should establish whether people beyond the convicted extremists were involved in facilitating, financing or enabling the attacks. Church leaders have also demanded greater clarity about the failure of state agencies to prevent them.
Fides News Agency noted after the verdict that Catholics have continued to press successive Sri Lankan governments for investigations into possible political or intelligence connections and have called for an independent prosecutor.
Such allegations remain contested and should be distinguished from the crimes established by the court. Sri Lankan authorities and political figures accused of involvement have denied claims that state actors deliberately facilitated the bombings.
What is established, however, is that serious warnings preceded the attacks. Investigations and legal proceedings have examined why intelligence indicating a possible imminent assault was not acted upon effectively.
The wider inquiry remains active. In February 2026, former State Intelligence Service chief Suresh Salley was arrested as investigators continued examining circumstances surrounding the bombings. His arrest does not itself establish criminal responsibility, and allegations concerning intelligence involvement remain subject to investigation and dispute.
Justice without collective blame
The religious dimension of the Easter attacks has always extended beyond the fact that churches were among the targets. The bombings also tested relations between Sri Lanka’s Christian and Muslim communities.
All of the defendants in the principal trial came from Sri Lanka’s Muslim minority, but Catholic leaders have repeatedly cautioned against transforming the search for justice into hostility toward Muslims generally.
That distinction remains important seven years later. Terrorism committed in religious language can create pressure to treat religious identity itself as evidence of collective responsibility. Yet the prosecution of identifiable individuals through criminal proceedings rests on the opposite principle: responsibility belongs to those whose conduct can be established through evidence.
Fides reported that Sri Lankan Catholic leaders have combined their demand for accountability with appeals for interreligious coexistence and against revenge directed at the wider Muslim population.
This approach is particularly relevant in Sri Lanka, whose modern history includes prolonged ethnic conflict and periods of tension involving Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim and Christian communities. The Easter attacks demonstrated how quickly extremist violence can threaten not only individual lives but also relations between entire communities.
A verdict, but not necessarily an ending
The September 22 judgment represents a major judicial milestone. Fifteen defendants have now been convicted after one of the most extensive criminal trials in Sri Lankan history, while nine were acquitted when the court did not find sufficient grounds to convict them.
For survivors and families of those killed, the sentences may provide one form of legal accountability. But the continuing investigations show that the public story of the Easter attacks is not yet completely settled.
The Catholic Church’s campaign has increasingly focused on a distinction between prosecuting the extremist network that carried out the violence and understanding whether institutional failures or other actors helped make the attacks possible. Claims about a wider conspiracy remain allegations unless established through credible evidence and legal proceedings.
That makes the verdict important for reasons beyond the severity of the sentences. It establishes criminal responsibility for individuals involved in preparing one of Asia’s deadliest recent attacks on religious worship, while leaving investigators, public institutions and religious leaders with a further question: whether the judicial process can also provide a convincing account of how such a carefully coordinated assault was allowed to happen.
Seven years after Easter worshippers entered churches expecting a morning of celebration, Sri Lanka has reached a significant point in its search for justice. The convictions close one major chapter. The effort to establish the fullest possible truth — while refusing to turn justice for Christian victims into suspicion of an entire religious minority — continues.