Diplomatic Circles Question the Credibility of Attorney General Parinda Ranasinghe Over Easter Sunday Proceedings

COLOMBO: Growing concern is emerging in diplomatic circles over what one diplomatic source described as the “slow and increasingly questionable” approach of Sri Lanka’s Attorney General, Parinda Ranasinghe, towards the continuing legal proceedings arising from the 2019 Easter Sunday terrorist attacks.

Speaking to Colombofire News Channel on condition of anonymity, the diplomatic source expressed frustration over the pace and direction of the proceedings, while raising particular questions about the role of the Attorney General’s Department and the reported sidelining of Additional Solicitor General Dileepa Peiris, who has played a prominent role in presenting the prosecution’s position before court.

The diplomat’s comments come at a particularly sensitive moment, as the Easter Sunday investigation remains one of the most politically and legally consequential matters in Sri Lanka. The case has generated sustained public demands for accountability, particularly concerning whether all those responsible for the attacks and any alleged failures preceding them will ultimately face legal consequences.

The diplomatic source questioned whether the Attorney General’s Department is moving with sufficient urgency.

“There is growing frustration among diplomatic observers about the pace at which this matter is proceeding. The Easter Sunday attacks were not an ordinary criminal incident. They affected Sri Lanka’s national security, tourism industry, economy and international reputation. The public deserves to know why the legal process continues to move so slowly.”

The source further questioned the reported change in the role of Dileepa Peiris, whose appearances in court have attracted considerable attention.

Public reporting confirms that Peiris has been directly involved in the Easter Sunday-related proceedings. In one recent hearing concerning former State Intelligence Service chief Suresh Sallay, Peiris presented detailed submissions regarding the progress of the investigation, including information relating to evidence allegedly obtained from France.

In another development, Peiris continued to appear for the prosecution in proceedings involving Sallay and made submissions concerning electronic evidence and travel restrictions.

This raises a fundamental question, according to the diplomatic source: why would an officer who has been actively presenting the prosecution's case in a highly sensitive national-security investigation be removed, replaced or otherwise prevented from continuing that role?

The source stressed that the question should not be interpreted as an allegation that the Attorney General has acted unlawfully. Rather, the concern is whether the public has been given a satisfactory explanation for any significant change in the prosecution team.

The Dileepa Peiris question

Peiris has become one of the most visible legal officers associated with the recent Easter Sunday proceedings. His submissions have placed several controversial allegations before court and have provided the public with a picture of the direction of the investigation.

His role has also generated controversy.

In May 2026, lawyers representing Suresh Sallay reportedly informed Attorney General Parinda Ranasinghe that they intended to lodge a formal complaint concerning remarks attributed to Peiris during court proceedings.

That development demonstrates that Peiris's role has become legally and politically sensitive. But controversy surrounding a prosecutor does not, by itself, establish that his removal or reassignment would be justified.

The diplomatic source therefore believes that any decision affecting Peiris's involvement should be transparent and capable of public explanation.

“If there is a professional reason, disciplinary reason or legal reason for changing the officer handling the matter, that should be explained. If there is no such reason, then people will naturally ask whether something else is taking place behind the scenes,” the source said.

Questions over the Attorney General's leadership

The controversy comes at a time when the credibility of Sri Lanka's prosecutorial institutions is under intense scrutiny.

The Attorney General is the country's chief legal officer, and the Attorney General's Department has a constitutional and institutional responsibility to exercise prosecutorial functions independently and according to law.

The official profile of Attorney General Parinda Ranasinghe states that he has represented Sri Lanka in several sensitive international legal negotiations, including mutual legal assistance, extradition and prisoner-transfer agreements.

The question now being raised by diplomatic observers is whether that institutional authority is being exercised with sufficient transparency in the Easter Sunday matter.

The source who spoke to Colombofire News Channel said the issue is not simply about one lawyer.

“It is about confidence in the entire justice process,” the source said.

“If prosecutors are changed, investigations are delayed, or important proceedings appear to lose momentum, the international community will inevitably ask whether Sri Lanka is genuinely committed to establishing the full truth about Easter Sunday.”

That concern is particularly significant because the attacks had international consequences. Foreign nationals were among those killed, and the attacks had a devastating effect on Sri Lanka's international image and tourism sector.

The credibility test

For Attorney General Ranasinghe, the issue may therefore become a test of institutional credibility.

The Attorney General's Department cannot merely prosecute cases; it must also maintain public confidence that decisions concerning prosecutions are made on legal and evidentiary grounds rather than political considerations.

The diplomatic source suggested that the Attorney General should provide greater clarity concerning the progress of the Easter Sunday investigations, the current prosecutorial strategy and the role assigned to individual senior law officers.

There is also a wider question.

If the prosecution possesses sufficient evidence to proceed against particular individuals, why should the public have to wait indefinitely for decisive legal action?

Conversely, if the evidence is insufficient, the authorities should explain the legal obstacles rather than allowing speculation to fill the vacuum.

The worst outcome, the diplomatic source warned, would be a perception that the Easter Sunday investigation is being allowed to drift.

A matter bigger than one Attorney General

The Easter Sunday investigation is ultimately larger than Parinda Ranasinghe, Dileepa Peiris or any individual government.

It concerns the credibility of Sri Lanka's justice system itself.

Recent court proceedings have demonstrated that significant allegations and investigative material are still being placed before court. Peiris's submissions regarding the investigation, including allegations concerning Suresh Sallay and information obtained from overseas, demonstrate that the matter remains active rather than legally dormant.

But an active investigation must eventually produce a clear legal outcome.

For diplomatic observers, the question is therefore increasingly direct:

Is Sri Lanka's Attorney General's Department moving decisively towards accountability for Easter Sunday, or is the process becoming unnecessarily prolonged?

The diplomatic source said international observers will be watching closely.

“The credibility of the Attorney General will ultimately be judged not by statements but by results,” the source said.

For Sri Lanka, the stakes are enormous. The victims and their families have waited years for answers. The public expects accountability. International partners expect confidence in Sri Lanka's rule-of-law institutions.

Any decision concerning senior prosecutors involved in the case must therefore withstand scrutiny.

If Dileepa Peiris has been removed or his role substantially altered, the Attorney General should be prepared to explain why.

Until such explanations are provided, questions about the direction, speed and credibility of the Easter Sunday proceedings are unlikely to disappear.