Proposed Judicial Retirement Age Extension Faces Criticism Over Judicial Independence in Sri Lanka

A political speaker has criticised the Sri Lankan government’s proposed extension of judges’ retirement age, arguing that the measure would not directly address court delays and could raise concerns about judicial independence.

The speaker claimed that several religious, legal and international organisations had expressed opposition to the proposal. These allegedly included the Mahanayake Theros, the Church of Ceylon, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka, international judicial organisations and Commonwealth-related bodies. The speaker urged the government to take these concerns seriously.

Court delays and proposed reforms

Addressing the government’s argument that extending judges’ service could help reduce the backlog of cases, the speaker said that delays in the justice system required broader reforms.

The speaker referred to a report prepared during their time as chair of a parliamentary sectoral oversight committee dealing with legal affairs, anti-corruption and media matters. According to the speaker, the report examined ways to reduce delays in court proceedings and included recommendations beyond changes to judges’ retirement ages.

The speaker also referred to a study conducted in 2023 under the Ministry of Justice with financial support from the Asian Development Bank. They claimed that the resulting report did not recommend extending judges’ retirement ages as a solution to court backlogs.

Instead, the speaker argued that reforms should focus on increasing the number of judges, addressing staff shortages, improving court administration and modernising outdated procedures. They also highlighted delays in forensic reports and other documents needed for legal proceedings.

Concerns about judicial independence

The speaker warned that changes affecting judges’ tenure could raise questions about the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. They argued that courts must remain independent institutions capable of providing remedies when members of the public experience injustice involving government bodies.

The speech also raised concerns about judges hearing cases that could affect their own tenure. The speaker argued that such circumstances could create a perceived conflict of interest and damage public confidence in the justice system.

The speaker further claimed that numerous legal challenges had been filed against the proposed constitutional change. The exact number and status of those cases were not independently confirmed in the material provided.

Potential economic and international consequences

The speaker warned that concerns about judicial independence could have consequences beyond the legal system, including possible effects on international confidence, investment and trade benefits such as the European Union’s GSP+ arrangement.

However, the speech did not provide evidence establishing that the proposed change would automatically result in the loss of trade concessions or a reduction in foreign investment.

The speaker concluded by urging the government to reconsider the proposal and pursue reforms that directly address delays in the justice system without undermining judicial independence.