THE CHEMICAL-WEAPONS CLAIM: REPEATED FOR 16 YEARS — WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE? Sandya Ekneligoda and the organisations that repeated the allegation must answer
For more than sixteen years, the name of Sandya Ekneligoda has been repeatedly presented internationally in connection with the disappearance of her husband, Prageeth Ekneligoda. Alongside that campaign was an allegation. She claims her husband Prageeth Ekneligoda was investigating the alleged use of chemical weapons by Sri Lanka’s Armed Forces. We are curious as to who tasked a cartoonist to investigate chemical weapons. The LTTE was eliminated in 2009 but the 2008 allegation needs to be tested against what evidence they claim to have. If he disappeared for knowing about its existence, how is she aware of it? If she is aware of it then she has to now produce the evidence. To date, what the public has been shown is a series of statements by Sandya about what her husband allegedly discovered, while the English article attributed to Prageeth appeared online only in 2013 (3 years after his supposed disappearance); where is the authenticated original, and what verifiable evidence proves that Prageeth himself made these findings in 2008?
LET’S START WITH SANDYA EKNELIGODA’S OWN WORDS
We are not putting words into Sandya Ekneligoda’s mouth.
We are examining claims attributed to her over the years and asking what happened to the evidence behind those claims.
In testimony before a UN Human Rights Council panel in Geneva on 11 March 2011, Sandya stated:
“In 2008 Prageeth wrote about the use of chemical weapons by the government forces against the people of the north.”
She then explained the source of the information.
It came from: “a meeting of religious dignitaries in the north.”
This automatically creates a series of very specific questions.
WHO WERE THESE RELIGIOUS DIGNITARIES?
Where was the meeting?
When did it take place?
Who organised it?
Who attended?
Who allegedly witnessed chemical-weapons use?
Why is she referring only to the North – the Armed Forces began is military-humanitarian operation in the East in July 2006.
If Prageeth and Sandya claim chemical weapons were used in the North – why was chemical weapons not used in the East.
If used in the East – why were there no religious people giving evidence to Prageeth?
Very puzzling indeed.
Who supplied the information to Prageeth – where was Prageeth at the time.
Did he travel to the North only. Why didn’t he travel to the East?
Why would they give evidence to Prageeth being only a cartoonist
What exactly did they tell him and what did they expect him to do with it?
Did they give evidence to Prageeth
Did Prageeth pass evidence to Sandya?
Where are the samples/documents/photos/medical evidence?
Where are their statements today to collaborate with Sandya’s?
After more than eighteen years, these are no longer unreasonable questions.
https://cpj.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Sandhya20Eknelygoda20UNHRC20Testimony.pdf
17 September 2011 — Uvindu Kurukulasuriya challenges the “Chemical Weapons Saga”
In an article to the Colombo Telegraph, Uvindu Kurukulasuriya questions the theory linking Prageeth’s disappearance to an alleged chemical-weapons investigation and discusses the lack of supporting evidence. His article raises a critical question: was the chemical-weapons narrative independently established, or was it being repeated without verification?
US-ICRC-INDIA confirm no use of Chemical Weapons
United States — Ambassador Robert O. Blake’s diplomatic cable, 10 April 2009
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09COLOMBO413_a.html / the US also quoted Uvindu’s article
Indian medical teams treated civilian evacuees and no report highlighted any victims of chemical weapons while ICRC reports did not highlight such use either.
PRAGEETHS BLOG
His blog has 2 articles & 53 cartoons only
Coincidentally, the Blogger account was reportedly created in April 2010—three months after Prageeth’s disappearance in January 2010.
The Sinhala chemical-weapons article was posted on 25 February 2011, shortly before Sandya’s UN Human Rights Council testimony on 11 March 2011.
Its English translation appeared on 2 April 2013.
The English post identifies the article as a lecture by Prageeth at “Auswin Labour School” on 22 December 2008. But the online publication dates do not independently establish that the lecture took place in 2008.
Who supplied the Sinhala text to the blogger?
Where is the original dated document?
Who can verify that the lecture took place, and who attended it?
These are questions that must be answered before the document can be treated as independently authenticated evidence of what Prageeth allegedly discovered.
https://prageethranjan.blogspot.com/p/articals.html
THE CLAIM BECAME MUCH STRONGER
A 2011 account reproducing Sandya’s letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon states:
“In late 2008, Prageeth produced conclusive evidence”
of the alleged use of chemical weapons against Tamil civilians in the North.
(what about the Tamils in the East)
Lets pause here.
“CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE”
This is not language of suspicion or rumor.
Sandya has taken Prageeth from simply “investigating.” to possessing “conclusive evidence”.
How did she know of it?
In her 2011 account she says Prageeth was gathering further evidence & raising awareness at forums locally & internationally – can she name the dates & venues.
More importantly if he had the evidence in 2008 – why would he need to search for more evidence?
If she knew of it – where is that conclusive evidence now or why did she not produce it to the UN in 2011?
SANDYA ALSO SAID PRAGEETH INFORMED DIPLOMATS
A BBC Sinhala report published in January 2011 quoted Sandya saying:
“In 2008, Prageeth wrote and informed the diplomats about the Sri Lankan government’s usage of chemical weapons against the people in the north.”
This is an extraordinarily specific statement.
It is going beyond Prageeth discussing the issue to even informing diplomats in writing too.
WHO ARE THESE DIPLOMATS?
Which embassies?
Where did the meetings occur?
Where is the letter?
Did he email it or post it?
Did Prageeth provide documents to the diplomats?
If what Sandya claims is true
Why have the diplomats not reported what Prageeth had written & given them to their government or the UN?
Was a diplomatic cable generated by the diplomats?
Was an embassy report generated?
Was the material sent to the United Nations?
Was it sent to the OPCW?
IF DIPLOMATS WERE INFORMED, WHERE IS THEIR RECORD?
So far we have not seen or heard one diplomat coming forward to confirm this 2011 claim.
JANUARY 2011 — THE ALLEGATION ENTERS THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM
On 24 January 2011, the first anniversary of Prageeth’s disappearance, Sandya handed a letter addressed to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to the UN Resident Coordinator in Sri Lanka.
Handing a letter is one thing, making an allegation is one thing but to internationalise an allegation there must be something more than a letter.
We would like to know what the UN Resident Coordinator did
Did he check the allegation?
Did he examine the evidence?
Did he interview the diplomats Sandya claimed her husband gave evidence to?
Where is this material
Why was it never produced?
Who independently established that chemical weapons had actually been used?
THE 22 DECEMBER 2008 DOCUMENT
The online text attributed to Prageeth Ekneligoda is titled:
“Ethnic War and Chemical Weapons” dated 22 December 2008 Auswin Labour School. We cannot find anything on such a school.
The English version was posted online in 2013 and describes itself as a translation of the Sinhala original (3 years after his disappearance)
https://prageethranjan.blogspot.com/2013/04/ethnic-war-and-chemical-weapons.html
DOES THIS DOCUMENT CONTAIN “CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE”?
One can write on chemical weapons, the conflict, the LTTE, the Govt but to make an allegation that the National Army used chemical weapons must have forensic evidence.
Where is:
- the identified chemical agent?
- the laboratory analysis?
- the medical toxicology?
- the chemical residue?
- the authenticated military document?
- the identified military unit?
- the identified weapon?
- the chain of custody?
- the independent expert assessment?
The existence of a document discussing chemical weapons is not the same thing as proof that a particular chemical weapon was used in a particular incident by a particular military unit.
THE TECHNICAL QUESTION CANNOT BE IGNORED
The surviving English text itself is said to be a translation.
That means the original Sinhala document should be produced.
It should be independently translated. Yet an article is insufficient evidence.
And technical claims concerning chemical weapons should be examined by someone qualified in chemical-weapons science.
For example, the surviving translation describes napalm as a “primary form” of chemical weapon.
WAS THE ORIGINAL SINHALA DOCUMENT EVER EXAMINED BY A CHEMICAL-WEAPONS EXPERT?
If yes:
Who?
When?
Where is the expert report?
If no:
Why was a document subsequently relied upon in an international narrative never subjected to technical verification?
THE MOST IMPORTANT CONTRADICTION
In a 2016 interview, Sandya said Prageeth was:
“in the process of researching and gathering information” on chemical weapons.
She also said
“And there is evidence that chemical weapons were used in Sri Lanka despite the government’s denial.”
Where is the evidence?
Had she personally seen it?
She then said:
“With his disappearance, all this information was lost.”
https://jrmora.com/en/interview-sandya-eknaligoda/
Aha – she went from investigating to having conclusive evidence and then in 2016 she says he was in the process of researching when he disappeared.
Now isn’t that fascinating.
PRAGEETH GOES MISSING
In a January 2011 BBC Sinhala report – Sandya stated that Prageeth had previously been taken away in a white van in August 2009 & released the following day.
When was the exact date – did she report to police – where is the copy of that complaint?
Was it actually an “abduction”?
Prageeth wrote his supposed chemical article on 22 December 2008
His employer Sandaruwan Senadheera who was in UK on political asylum till 2026 reported Prageeth as having left the E-news office on 24 January 2010 and that his wife had lodged a missing complaint with the Homagama Police on 25 January 2010.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa37/003/2010/en/ – AMNESTY
https://www.ecoi.net/en/document/1208613.html? – Reports Sans Frontiers
https://bbcbreakingnews.pages.dev/sinhala/news/story/2010/01/100131_prageeth_charles.shtml – BBC Sinhala
It is curious how international media claim a person as disappeared simply because he does not come home the next day and notice how they include an underlying reason for being “missing” – that he was favoring the opposing candidate Fonseka.
But where are the articles that he had written openly canvassing politically?
If he wrote an article on chemical weapons in December 2008 why was Prageeth referring to the use of chemical weapons only against Northern Tamils? The Northern battle commenced towards the end of 2008 after the East was liberated.
WHO PRESERVED THE EVIDENCE OF PRAGEETH
Who preserved his notes?
Who preserved his source material?
Who preserved his correspondence?
Who preserved his photographs?
Who preserved his evidence?
Who preserved the alleged reports from the religious dignitaries?
Who preserved the alleged diplomatic communications?
Who preserved the original lecture?
Who preserved the alleged “conclusive evidence”?
Does Sandya have it – if so why has she not presented it?
IF NO ONE HAS THE EVIDENCE WHY ARE INTERNATIONAL ENTITIES QUOTING HER
There is a fundamental difference between:
“Prageeth was researching the allegation.”
and
“Prageeth produced conclusive evidence.”
Which is it?
Sandya must answer.
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL — WHAT DID YOU VERIFY?
In 2017 Amnesty International wrote:
“In 2008, Prageeth delivered a lecture alleging the army’s use of chemical weapons in the armed conflict.”
“ALLEGING” – this shows there is no established evidence.
DID AMNESTY INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE ALLEGATION?
What is this original lecture – was it in English or Sinhala?
interview people who attended it?
identify the religious sources?
inspect Prageeth’s research?
obtain the alleged chemical evidence?
identify the alleged chemical agent?
obtain medical evidence?
obtain laboratory evidence?
consult chemical-weapons experts?
consult the OPCW?
Or was Amnesty simply repeated what was told to them by Sandya or other sources?
If Amnesty independently verified the allegation:
Show the verification.
If Amnesty did not independently verify it:
Then identify it as an allegation — not as an established historical fact.
CPJ — WHAT DID YOU INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY?
The Committee to Protect Journalists has also described Prageeth as reporting on alleged military use of chemical weapons against Tamil civilians.
CPJ is entitled to report the allegation but did CPJ independently verify the allegation.
Or was CPJ relying on the accounts of Sandya and others?
If it independently verified the claim:
Produce the verification.
If it did not:
Say so.
THE 2019 “FORMER AIR FORCE OFFICER”
In a 2019 CIVICUS interview, Sandya said that in 2018 she was approached by:
“a former air force officer” who allegedly offered to disclose information about chemical weapons in exchange for safe passage to the USA.
Is she the consular officer of the US embassy to be giving safe passage to the USA?
She said she believed the approach was a trap designed to distract her from seeking justice for Prageeth.
We are not calling this allegation true or false but we want to know WHO THIS FORMER AIR FORCE OFFICER IS – IF HE IS AN AIR FORCE OFFICER TOO.
Date of approach?
Place?
Who introduced him?
Was the meeting recorded/camera evidence?
Did he produce documents?
Photographs?
Samples?
Did he identify the chemical?
Did he identify the alleged military unit?
Did Sandya report the approach to the police?
To the OPCW?
To the UN?
To a foreign embassy?
To an international organisation?
And if Sandya believed the approach was a trap:
WHAT EVIDENCE ESTABLISHED THAT IT WAS A TRAP?
THE 2008 OPCW RECORD MAKES THE QUESTION HARDER
The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons held its Asian Regional Meeting in Colombo on 25–26 August 2008, only months before the alleged Prageeth lecture and article. This is interesting.
The meeting involved representatives from 20 States Parties.
The Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, Ratnasiri Wickramanayaka, inaugurated the meeting.
The OPCW record quotes the PM saying:
“as far as the government is aware there are no chemical weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction in Sri Lanka.”
IF PRAGEETH HAD “CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE” IN 2008, WHY WAS IT NOT TAKEN TO THE OPCW DELEGATION WHO WAS IN COLOMBO?
Representatives of States Parties were there.
National authorities were there.
Parliamentarians were there.
The subject was chemical weapons.
So:
Why didnt Prageeth approach them?
WHAT HAPPENED WHEN THE ISSUE WAS DISCUSSED INTERNATIONALLY IN 2009?
A 2009 US diplomatic cable later made public reported that the ICRC and the Indian Ambassador had said their medical teams treating wounded people had encountered no evidence of chemical-weapons or phosphorus use.
The same cable recorded Foreign Secretary Palitha Kohona denying that Sri Lanka had acquired chemical weapons and stating that the Government had requested an OPCW investigation into allegations concerning LTTE chemical-weapons use.
WHERE WAS PRAGEETH’S “CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE”?
ACTUAL CHEMICAL-WEAPONS INVESTIGATION INVOLVES
- interviews with casualties;
- first responders;
- treating physicians;
- witnesses;
- biomedical samples;
- environmental samples;
- clinical records;
- investigation reports;
- autopsy findings where available;
- munition remnants;
- laboratory analysis.
- Samples examined through designated laboratories.
WHICH OF THESE EXISTS IN THE EKNELIGODA CHEMICAL-WEAPONS CLAIM?
Where are the samples?
Where are the laboratory reports?
Where are the medical records?
Where are the toxicological findings?
Where are the munition remnants?
Where are the expert findings?
Where is the identified toxic chemical?
Where is the chain of custody?
Where is the independent verification?
SIXTEEN YEARS IS NOT A SHORT PERIOD
Prageeth disappeared on 24 January 2010.
As of October 2026:
16 YEARS AND MORE THAN 8 MONTHS HAVE PASSED.
The alleged chemical-weapons document is dated 22 December 2008.
NEARLY 18 YEARS AGO.
The allegation has had nearly two decades to acquire supporting evidence.
ONLY THE REPETITION HAS MULTIPLIED.
Sandya repeats it,
Another organisation quotes Sandya.
Another organisation quotes that organisation.
A later article quotes the earlier article.
Another organisation cites the later article.
Eventually an allegation can acquire the appearance of established fact simply because it has been repeated often enough.
REPETITION IS NOT VERIFICATION OR FACT.
A hundred citations to an allegation does not automatically create guilt.
AN NGO REPEATING AN ALLEGATION IS NOT INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION.
AN INTERNATIONAL FORUM HEARING AN ALLEGATION DOES NOT TRANSFORM IT INTO AN ESTABLISHED FACT.
CREDIBILITY TEST
Sandya Ekneligoda can seek answers about where her husband is.
Without a dead body – no one can claim him to be killed.
He may be still living somewhere.
There are many runaway LTTE cadres living overseas under false identities.
There are 2 matters at hand.
His disappearance & both their allegations about chemical weapons.
2011 — GENEVA
Prageeth was said to have written about chemical weapons based on information revealed at a meeting of religious dignitaries.
Question: Who were they?
2011 — INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN
Prageeth was described as having produced:
“conclusive evidence”
Question: Where is it?
2011 — BBC
Prageeth was said to have:
“informed the diplomats”
Question: Which diplomats? Where are their records?
2016
Sandya said Prageeth was:
“in the process of researching and gathering information”
and:
“With his disappearance, all this information was lost.”
Question: What evidence survived? Who preserved it?
If she knows so much – she should be having the evidence. Why in over 16 years has she not produced it?
2017 — AMNESTY
The claim was described as a lecture:
“alleging the army’s use of chemical weapons”
Question: Did Amnesty independently verify the allegation? Where & when was this lecture & to whom?
2019
A new allegation emerged concerning:
“a former air force officer”
Question: Who was he? What evidence did he possess?
2022
The allegation continued to be repeated.
2026
We are still asking:
WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?
THE QUESTION FOR EVERY ORGANISATION THAT REPEATED THE CLAIM
TO AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
Did you independently verify the chemical-weapons allegation?
If yes, produce the verification.
If no, why has the allegation been allowed to circulate internationally without independent verification?
TO THE COMMITTEE TO PROTECT JOURNALISTS
Did you independently verify the allegation?
What original evidence did you examine?
Who were your original sources?
TO REPORTERS WITHOUT BORDERS
Did you independently verify the allegation?
What evidence did you personally examine?
TO THE FREE MEDIA MOVEMENT
Did you independently verify the chemical-weapons allegation?
Who were the original sources?
What documentary material did you possess?
TO OTHER INTERNATIONAL NGOs AND ADVOCACY ORGANISATIONS
Did you see the evidence?
Who were the original sources?
Did you interview them?
Did you obtain the original documents?
Did you obtain medical evidence?
Did you obtain laboratory evidence?
Did you identify the alleged chemical?
Did you identify the alleged weapon?
Did you identify the alleged military unit?
Did you consult the OPCW?
Did you identify the diplomats allegedly informed by Prageeth?
Did you obtain their records?
Did you distinguish an allegation from an established fact?
IF YOU VERIFIED IT — SHOW US WHAT YOU VERIFIED.
IF YOU DID NOT — SAY THAT YOU REPEATED AN ALLEGATION.
AND TO SANDYA EKNELIGODA
If you claim that your husband wrote, gave a lecture, informed diplomats about chemical weapons – why have you not produced the evidence given that you are repeating his claims annually adding to your statements.
Searching for a husband is one thing but making allegations in international & public forums against a National Army demands evidence and proof.
PRODUCE:
- The original “conclusive evidence.”
- The published original Sinhala version of the claimed 22 December 2008 document which only appeared on the Prageeth blog in 2013 alongside the English version.
- The names of the religious dignitaries who allegedly supplied the information.
- Their statements.
- The names of the diplomats Prageeth allegedly informed.
- Their correspondence or diplomatic records.
- The alleged medical evidence.
- The alleged laboratory evidence.
- The identity of the chemical agent.
- The identity of the weapon or delivery system.
- The identity of the military unit allegedly responsible.
- The evidence supposedly possessed by the former Air Force officer who allegedly approached Sandya in 2018.
- The identity of that officer.
- Any report made concerning that approach.
- The identity of any independent expert who verified the evidence.
These are not unreasonable demands after nearly two decades.
We are asking Sandya to produce the evidence.
The people depend on media reports and people expect truth & facts from media reports. Our analysis too depends on these reports.
Shenali D Waduge
