Questions raised at PCoI over CID’s failure to arrest ‘Army Mohideen’

It was revealed at the Presidential Commission of Inquiry probing the 2019 Easter Attacks that ‘Army Mohideen’ arrested over the attacks may have had connections with the officials of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID).

Giving evidence before the Commission yesterday (23), an intelligence officer attached to the Eastern Province stated that he has doubts as to why ‘Army Mohideen’ was not arrested by the CID when they had already been provided intelligence information.

Prior to Easter attacks, the State Intelligence Service (SIS), as they had no legal power to arrest suspects, had informed the CID that ‘Army Mohideen’, who had been issued arrest warrants, was hiding in Pasikudah, away from his residence in Kattankudy.

Accordingly, a group of CID officials including Sub-Inspector Dias and Sergeant Nandalal had arrived in Pasikudah on March 07, 2019. However, ‘Army Mohideen’ had not been arrested on that occasion, the intelligence officer told the Commission.

He further said that, had ‘Army Mohideen’ been arrested that day, the SIS intended to arrest Zahran Hashim through the interrogation of the arrested suspect. Subsequently, they were unable to arrest Zahran Hashim and the Easter Attacks took place, he said.

Following the attack, the SIS had managed to arrest ‘Army Mohideen’ at Oddamavadi on April 24, 2019, under the special powers vested with them, he added.

However, a photo of Sergeant Nandalal of the CID was on the contact list of the mobile phone seized from Mohideen, the witness then told the Commission. He added that the call logs of the phone had also been deleted at the point of arrest.

Meanwhile, it was also revealed that both Sub-Inspector Dias and Sergeant Nandalal had accompanied the SIS team which had arrested ‘Army Mohideen’, on April 24, along with the witness.

When the team had arrived to arrest Mohideen, he had told SIS officers that he had no connection to the attacks and to inquire Sergeant Nandalal of his innocence.

Witness further said that he had reprimanded the two CID officers that the attack would not have taken place if the CID team had arrested Mohideen at the previous occasion.

A Commissioner of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry questioned the intelligence officer whether he had suspected of a connection between CID Sergeant Nandalal and ‘Army Mohideen’ through this exchange, to which the witness responded in affirmative.

The Commission then inquired the witness as to why ‘Army Mohideen’ was not arrested by the Kattankudy Police during the Aliyar conflict which occurred on March 10, 2017. The witness told the Commission that the arrest may not have taken place as ‘Army Mohideen’ had been providing the Kattankudy Police with money.