Why Is Interpol Investigating Imthiyas alias “Nawshad” Over Alleged Easter Financing Links?
Seven years after the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings, the financial architecture behind the attack remains one of the most opaque dimensions of Sri Lanka’s worst post-war atrocity. While operational details and intelligence failures have been dissected in parliamentary debates and courtrooms, the funding pipeline — who paid, who transferred, who facilitated — is still under scrutiny.
Now, new intelligence inquiries reportedly involving Interpol have placed a prominent Sri Lankan businessman, Imthiyas alias “Nawshad,” under examination. The development raises a question that has lingered unanswered since April 21, 2019: who financed the Easter Sunday terrorists?
This article does not assert guilt. It examines the network of relationships, financial corridors, and political associations that investigators are said to be reviewing.
A Businessman With Political Reach
Imthiyas, widely known by the alias Nawshad, is described in business circles as a leading vehicle importer originally from Kandy but operating primarily out of Colombo. Over the past decade, he has reportedly cultivated close associations across political lines.
Among those frequently mentioned in connection with him is former Minister Rishad Bathiudeen. During a period when mineral exports became commercially strategic, Nawshad was allegedly involved in ilmenite export operations from Pulmudai — a highly sensitive mineral resource zone.
Subsequently, attention shifted to proposed zircon sand exports from Vakarai in Batticaloa. That development allegedly coincided with proximity to former Eastern Province Chief Minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan, widely known as Pillayan.
Such networks do not constitute wrongdoing. But when a terrorism financing inquiry intersects with mineral export corridors and political intermediaries, investigators pay attention.
The Pillayan Prison Allegation
A key turning point in the broader Easter investigation narrative came via a controversial statement allegedly made by a close associate of Pillayan to international media and representatives connected to the United Nations.
According to that account — which remains disputed and unproven — while detained in Batticaloa Prison, Pillayan purportedly requested financial assistance be channelled to Zahran Hashim and his associates through intermediaries.
Zahran Hashim was the ideological leader of the Easter attackers.
If investigators are now probing whether business-linked intermediaries facilitated funds, the relevance becomes clear. However, these allegations have not been adjudicated in court, and Pillayan has denied wrongdoing in related matters.
The issue is not the political theatre. It is the money trail.
The Jameel Connection: A Critical Unanswered Question
One of the most puzzling figures in the Easter plot was Abdul Latheef Jameel Mohammed — often referred to as Jameel — the bomber who reportedly altered his target at the last minute.
Originally believed to have intended to detonate explosives at the Taj Samudra Hotel in Colombo, Jameel instead travelled south toward Dehiwala, where he later detonated his device near the Tropical Inn guesthouse.
Why did he change course?
According to information circulating among investigative journalists, Jameel reportedly visited a mosque in the Wellawatte–Dehiwala area on the morning of the attack, allegedly seeking to meet a particular individual. That individual, sources claim, had connections to Nawshad’s religious and social network.
Jameel is said to have prayed and waited but failed to meet the intended contact. He subsequently left and carried out the suicide blast.
These movements have long raised suspicions among investigators. Was Jameel attempting to confirm funding? Await final instructions? Seek refuge? Or resolve a logistical issue?
No official conclusion has been published.
But if Interpol is examining Nawshad’s financial activities, investigators may be attempting to reconstruct whether there was any monetary linkage between commercial entities and operational cells.
Financing Terror: The Missing Ledger
The Easter Sunday attacks were sophisticated. They required:
-
Safe houses
-
Explosive materials
-
International communication channels
-
Vehicles
-
Travel logistics
-
Training
Such operations require funding streams. Whether those funds came exclusively from small local donations, international ISIS-linked transfers, or domestic political patrons remains one of the case’s most sensitive questions.
The public narrative has largely focused on ideological radicalisation. But ideology alone does not finance detonators, rental properties, or coordinated attacks across multiple cities.
If Nawshad’s businesses were conduits — knowingly or unknowingly — for financial transfers, forensic accounting would be required to establish:
-
Source of funds
-
Beneficiary accounts
-
Transactional patterns
-
Any abnormal cash movements before April 2019
To date, no formal charges related to financing have been publicly confirmed against him.
Mineral Exports and Political Patronage
The mineral export angle adds another layer. Ilmenite and zircon sands are not casual commodities. They are strategic industrial minerals with international demand.
Pulmudai has historically been under tight state oversight. Vakarai, similarly, is geopolitically sensitive.
If a businessman operating within these sectors maintained close ties to multiple political actors between 2015 and 2019 — including figures linked to both the previous government and security establishment — investigators would naturally examine whether such networks created financial leverage points.
Sources suggest Nawshad maintained relationships not only with provincial power brokers but also with members of the so-called “inner circle” around former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa.
Again, association does not prove conspiracy. But in complex terrorism financing cases, relational mapping is standard investigative practice.
Who Forced Whom?
A particularly troubling question circulating within investigative circles is whether Nawshad — if funds moved — acted voluntarily, under coercion, or under political pressure.
If business interests intersect with militant financing, investigators must determine:
-
Was money solicited under threat?
-
Were there political directives?
-
Were funds disguised as business transactions?
-
Did the businessman understand the end-use?
Terror financing statutes distinguish between knowing facilitation and unwitting financial exposure.
The difference is legally decisive.
Interpol’s Interest: What It May Mean
When Interpol becomes involved in a case, it typically reflects cross-border financial elements. That could include:
-
International transfers
-
Offshore accounts
-
Travel-linked intelligence
-
Sanctions monitoring
If Easter-linked financing passed through foreign jurisdictions — particularly the Middle East, South Asia, or Europe — Interpol’s coordination would be procedural rather than sensational.
But the optics are politically explosive.
The Broader Political Context
Since 2023, Sri Lanka’s Easter narrative has shifted significantly. Allegations of internal complicity, intelligence manipulation, and political exploitation have complicated the earlier “ISIS-only” explanation.
If financing now becomes the focal point, it could either:
-
Reinforce the theory of purely extremist funding, or
-
Open a new chapter implicating business-political nexuses.
The truth may lie somewhere in between.
Silence and Speculation
Notably, Nawshad has not publicly addressed the reported Interpol interest. Nor have Sri Lankan authorities issued detailed briefings clarifying the scope of inquiry.
In high-profile investigations, silence breeds speculation. Transparency would reduce rumour-driven narratives.
What Must Happen Next
If authorities are serious about uncovering the Easter funding architecture, they must:
-
Publish audited forensic financial findings
-
Clarify whether any international red notices or cooperation requests exist
-
Distinguish between inquiry and accusation
-
Protect due process
Terror financing investigations collapse when politicised.
The Unfinished Question
The Easter Sunday bombings were not only a security failure. They were a financial puzzle.
If Imthiyas alias Nawshad is under international scrutiny, the public deserves clarity:
-
Did money flow?
-
From whom?
-
Through what channels?
-
Under what pressure?
Until those answers are established in court, allegations remain allegations.
But one fact is certain: the money trail — not just the ideology — may ultimately determine whether Sri Lanka confronts the full architecture of April 21, 2019.
And that architecture, investigators suggest, may be more complex than previously acknowledged.