Sri Lankan court convicts 15 in 2019 Easter bombings case after years-long trial

A Sri Lankan high court has convicted 15 men over their roles in the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings, a landmark ruling in a case tied to one of the deadliest attacks in the country’s modern history. The verdict matters because it resolves the main criminal trial arising from the coordinated suicide blasts that killed hundreds of worshippers, hotel guests and bystanders on April 21, 2019.

The court found 14 defendants guilty on all charges and a 15th guilty on some charges, according to local and international reporting on the decision. Nine other accused were acquitted. The case was heard before a three-judge trial-at-bar in Colombo under tight security, with sentencing and subsequent proceedings continuing after the verdict was delivered.

The Easter Sunday attacks struck three churches and three hotels in Colombo, Negombo and Batticaloa during Easter services and holiday gatherings. The bombings killed 279 people and wounded about 500 others, including foreign nationals, and prompted years of investigation, public anger and demands for accountability. The attacks also intensified political pressure over security lapses that allowed the plot to go forward despite earlier warnings.

How the case reached verdict

The criminal case was widely described as one of the largest in Sri Lanka’s legal history. One local outlet said the prosecution presented testimony from 2,309 witnesses and that the case involved more than 23,000 charges. Al Jazeera’s reporting also said the proceedings centered on 24 defendants accused of direct involvement in the attacks. Other related cases have already led to convictions of senior former officials for negligence tied to the security failures surrounding the bombings.

The verdict brings the long-running trial into a new phase, but it does not end the wider controversy around the attacks. Sri Lanka’s Catholic Church and victims’ families have long pressed for a fuller accounting of who planned the bombings, who enabled them and whether state failures contributed to the scale of the disaster. The court’s ruling marks the most consequential judicial outcome so far, even as broader questions about intelligence, command responsibility and the wider network behind the attacks remain part of the public record.