- K. W. Janaranjana
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has requested Minister of Justice Harshana Nanayakkara to appoint an appropriate committee representing all key stakeholders to conduct a comprehensive and formal study and submit a report on the proposed constitutional amendment (22nd Amendment) aimed at raising the retirement age of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges. This request was made in a letter sent to the Minister on July 16, signed by BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya and Secretary Nalin de Silva.
The letter further requests an opportunity for a delegation comprising BASL executive committee members, senior President’s Counsel, and senior members of the legal profession to meet with the Minister to discuss the matter. The Association also urges that the proposed constitutional amendment to extend the retirement age of superior court judges not be proceeded with without broad consultation with key stakeholders.
The BASL emphasizes that the proposal to extend the retirement age is a matter of exceptional constitutional significance, bearing profound implications for the independence of the judiciary, the administration of justice, and the rule of law. The letter urges the government to consider the grave concerns raised by the broader legal community, members of the judiciary, prominent domestic and international jurists, and leading legal organizations.
The Association points out that on March 30, it sent a letter to the Minister of Justice seeking clarification to confirm whether such an amendment was being introduced. Receiving no response, the BASL sent another letter to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake on May 25, articulating the legal community’s position against any such proposal. It notes that no response or official observation has been received from the government regarding either letter to date.
The BASL argues that the recent increase in the approved cadre of judges in both courts has adequately addressed issues relating to judicial capacity and workload. Consequently, there is no apparent institutional necessity to alter the retirement age of judges.
The Association further asserts that any constitutional amendment aimed solely at extending the tenure of sitting judges in superior courts will inevitably raise questions regarding its purpose and motivation. This would erode public confidence in the independence of the judiciary—a confidence built on the belief that the judiciary is genuinely independent and entirely free from influence, favor, or compliance.
“Constitutional amendments affecting superior courts should not be made as an ad-hoc measure in response to temporary circumstances or as an emergency action. Such significant amendments should only be introduced with a demonstrable institutional need, transparent public justification, and broad, meaningful stakeholder consultation. Public trust in constitutional governance depends not only on the content of the amendment, but also on the process followed to achieve it.
There is unprecedented opposition to this proposal. Concerns extend far beyond the BASL, with opposition voiced by members of the judiciary, former judges, senior lawyers, prominent academics, and recognized international legal organizations,” the BASL letter states.
At the Cabinet meeting on July 14, the Cabinet directed the Minister of Justice to submit a report incorporating observations from the Ministry of Justice before a final decision is made on the proposal. In light of this, the BASL requests the Ministry to ensure that the views of all key stakeholders are reflected during this process.
“For decades under successive governments, consulting the Bar Association of Sri Lanka on legislative and policy actions affecting the administration of justice has been an established practice of the Ministry of Justice. This reflects the BASL’s ongoing responsibility to uphold the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary, and due process in the administration of justice,” the Association adds.
Prior to taking further steps, the BASL has requested the appointment of a committee comprising representatives from the Ministry of Justice, the Judiciary, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka, and other relevant stakeholders to thoroughly study the proposal. They have also requested a meeting with the Minister of Justice, urging that no further action be taken until meaningful discussions have concluded.
