The Wheels of Justice Are Finally Moving in Sri Lanka’s Civil War-era Cases
Sri Lanka has always insisted that domestic mechanisms are capable of dealing with alleged crimes that occurred during the decades of civil war in the country from 1983 to 2009. Activist groups within and outside the country were skeptical of such claims. They had long insisted that it was impossible for the Sri Lankan state to conduct an impartial investigation into these allegations, and until quite recently, the track record of such prosecutions was not promising.
However, in the past few weeks, two of Sri Lanka’s long-running conflict-era criminal cases have seen significant breakthroughs. The Court of Appeal ordered a retrial of six former soldiers acquitted over the 1996 Kumarapuram massacre, while the Attorney General indicted former Eastern Province Chief Minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan, also known as Pillayan, and three others over the alleged abduction and murder of a prominent academic in 2006.
Investigations into these two cases began many years ago. However, as in other cases involving powerful people that are now nearing completion, progress was slow, as the accused or their political masters retained influence over the state. Thus, despite having necessary laws, investigators, and courts theoretically capable of pursuing powerful people, political interference and protection prevented those institutions from completing their work.
Since the National People’s Power (NPP) came to power in 2024, investigators and prosecutors have made visible progress in several cases, signaling an important change in Sri Lanka’s political and legal landscape. By weakening political and institutional protection, the NPP has allowed the criminal justice system to display greater independence and determination. It indicates that Sri Lanka, under the NPP administration, can objectively investigate allegations of crimes that took place during the war.
The alleged massacre at Kumarapuram, a Tamil village in Trincomalee District, took place on February 11, 1996. After Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) fighters killed two soldiers, Sri Lankan Army personnel entered the village and killed 24 civilians and injured 25 others, according to the indictment.
The authorities arrested several soldiers, and witnesses identified suspects during an identification parade. The case took 20 years to reach trial and an Anuradhapura High Court jury acquitted six former army corporals in July 2016 after the judge excluded documents connected to the identification parade.
The Attorney General appealed the acquittal that year. A decade later, the Court of Appeal ruled that the High Court had erred by refusing to admit these documents because they lacked an official signature and date. The appellate court ordered a retrial.
Of course, this does not mean the six former soldiers are guilty of the alleged crime or that there is new evidence against them. But the order gives prosecutors another opportunity to present the case and allows a court to consider evidence excluded from the original trial.
The fact that the Rajapaksas installed Pillayan as chief minister of the Eastern Province in itself was a damning indictment of the impunity and lawlessness of the Rajapaksa era. During his tenure as the chief minister, Pillayan was accused of a number of heinous crimes. Among them is the disappearance of Professor Sivasubramaniam Raveendranath, then vice-chancellor of Eastern University, after he attended a scientific conference in Colombo on December 15, 2006. He had previously received death threats and moved from Batticaloa to Colombo after an armed group abducted another university official and demanded Raveendranath’s resignation.
The professor disappeared from an area of Colombo with a heavy security forces presence. At the time, Amnesty International said the circumstances suggested that an armed group operated by Pillayan abducted the professor with the tacit support of the security forces. Raveendranath’s family never received his remains or a credible official account of what happened.
Pillayan belonged to the LTTE before joining the breakaway faction led by Vinayagamoorthy Muralitharan, also known as Karuna Amman – who also faces serious allegations about his activities during his time in the LTTE and after – as an ally of the Rajapaksas. This faction established the Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal (TMVP) and aligned itself with President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government. Pillayan entered electoral politics, and became chief minister of the Eastern Province in one of the most violent elections in recent decades. He later served as a member of Parliament and state minister.
Successive governments thought the TMVP was an important political partner in the Eastern Province. This gave TMVP leaders access to state resources despite longstanding allegations of abductions, killings, and child recruitment. Human Rights Watch had alleged that sections of the security forces knew about or assisted some of TMVP’s activities.
The Criminal Investigation Department arrested Pillayan in April 2025, several months after the NPP formed a government. Investigators subsequently named him as a principal suspect and presented evidence gathered during a renewed investigation. The Attorney General has now indicted him and three others before the Polonnaruwa High Court.
The simultaneous progress of the Kumarapuram and Raveendranath cases does not prove that the NPP directed either outcome. The NPP has insisted political direction would undermine the legitimacy of action against the rich and the powerful.
The government’s main contribution lies in the creation of an environment in which investigators, prosecutors, and judges face less pressure when dealing with a suspect with political connections. This change goes beyond conflict-era cases. Since the NPP came to power, law enforcement agencies have acted against former ministers, senior intelligence officers, senior officials, and politically connected business figures. This is an indication that political office no longer provides the degree of insulation it once did.
Mass graves are an even harder test of domestic accountability. Investigations have often stalled, leaving remains unidentified and families without answers. The NPP government’s support for the court-supervised excavations at Chemmani, along with its willingness to seek international forensic expertise, offers an opportunity to break that cycle.
These developments also strengthen the NPP’s argument that Sri Lankan institutions can address allegations of serious human rights violations through domestic processes. Colombo has consistently rejected international accountability mechanisms established through the United Nations Human Rights Council. Regardless of political ideology, most Sri Lankans believe that such a mechanism is an infringement of the country’s sovereignty. And the NPP believes that independent national institutions offer a more legitimate and sustainable path to justice.
Critics have challenged that position because previous governments repeatedly used domestic commissions and investigations to deflect international pressure without holding perpetrators accountable. Political interference, delays, missing evidence, and intimidation damaged public confidence, particularly among Tamils in the north and east.
Since the NPP took office, investigators, prosecutors, and courts have fast-tracked several long-delayed cases involving politically connected suspects. This progress suggests that national institutions can pursue serious crimes when the government is committed to the rule of law.
