From Easter Sunday to Aragalaya, He Led the Police Through Extraordinary Times
Few police officers have served during a more demanding period in Sri Lanka’s recent history than former Inspector General of Police C.D. Wickramaratne.
Joining the Sri Lanka Police in 1986 after graduating in the physical sciences, he rose steadily through the ranks before being appointed Acting Inspector General of Police in the immediate aftermath of the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks in April 2019. He was confirmed as the country’s 35th Inspector General of Police in November 2020.
C.D.Wickramaratne….
The timing of that appointment meant his tenure would be defined not by routine policing but by successive national crises
He inherited a police service under intense public criticism following the Easter Sunday attacks.
Questions surrounding intelligence failures, institutional accountability and public confidence dominated the national conversation. Rebuilding operational effectiveness while restoring public trust became immediate priorities.
Within months, the COVID-19 pandemic placed the police at the centre of an unprecedented public health emergency. Officers became responsible not only for maintaining law and order but also for enforcing quarantine regulations, travel restrictions and public health directives.
As the country emerged from the pandemic, another crisis followed.
Sri Lanka’s economic collapse triggered widespread public demonstrations, culminating in the Aragalaya protest movement. Police found themselves operating under extraordinary pressure as they attempted to balance the constitutional right to peaceful protest with the need to maintain public order.
Supporters argued that the police service continued functioning under exceptionally difficult circumstances. Critics questioned certain operational decisions made during periods of heightened political tension. Such debate is inevitable for any police chief serving during times of national upheaval.
Following his retirement, the office of Inspector General itself entered one of the most contentious periods in its history, with legal challenges, constitutional disputes and successive changes in leadership further placing the institution under public examination.
His death has therefore resonated beyond the policing community.
It marks the passing of a man whose professional life intersected with many of the defining events of contemporary Sri Lankan history. Whatever assessments history ultimately makes of his leadership, few would dispute that he served during one of the most demanding periods ever experienced by the modern Sri Lanka Police.
As investigations into his death continue, it is perhaps appropriate to distinguish between the man, the office he held and the institution he led.
Each deserves to be examined fairly, each carries its own legacy, and each remains part of Sri Lanka’s continuing conversation about policing, accountability and the rule of law.
