COLOMBO – The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has called on Justice and National Integration Minister Harshana Nanayakkara to suspend plans to amend the Constitution to increase the retirement age of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges until comprehensive consultations are held with key stakeholders.
In a letter dated July 16, 2026, the BASL said the proposed constitutional amendment carries “profound implications” for judicial independence, the administration of justice and the rule of law, and urged the government to carefully consider concerns raised by the legal profession, members of the judiciary and both local and international legal organizations.
The BASL said it had previously sought clarification from the minister in March on whether the government intended to pursue such an amendment but had received no response. It subsequently wrote to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake in May outlining its opposition to the proposal, but said that communication also went unanswered.
According to the BASL, the retirement ages of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges have remained unchanged since the 1978 Constitution came into force, and no compelling institutional need has been demonstrated to justify revising the constitutional provisions.
The association also noted that the recent expansion of the approved judicial cadre of both courts had substantially addressed concerns relating to judicial capacity and case backlogs.
The BASL argued that extending the tenure of sitting superior court judges through a constitutional amendment would inevitably raise questions about the purpose and motivation behind the proposal and could undermine public confidence in the independence of the judiciary.
It stressed that constitutional amendments affecting the superior courts should not be introduced on an ad hoc basis or in response to temporary circumstances, but only where there is a demonstrable institutional necessity, transparent public justification and broad stakeholder consultation.
The letter said the proposal has generated widespread public debate and “unprecedented opposition” from across the justice sector, including serving and retired judges, senior lawyers, academics and international legal bodies.
The BASL cited remarks by Indian Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, Immediate Past President of LAWASIA and Vice-President of the Indian Bar Association, who argued that the proposal “fails the smell test” because it raises concerns about the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.
The association also referred to a statement made by the Cabinet Spokesperson following the Cabinet meeting on July 14, which indicated that the Ministry of Justice had been asked to submit its observations before Cabinet reaches a final decision on the proposal.
The BASL said this presented an opportunity to ensure that any report submitted to Cabinet reflects the views of the principal stakeholders in the justice sector.
The association urged the minister to appoint a committee comprising representatives of the Ministry of Justice, the judiciary, the BASL and other relevant stakeholders to comprehensively study the proposal and submit an independent report before any further action is taken.
It also requested an early meeting between the minister and a BASL delegation comprising Executive Committee members, senior President’s Counsel and other senior members of the legal profession to discuss the proposal.
The BASL said it remains willing to assist the government in any consultative process and expressed hope that no further steps would be taken until meaningful engagement had taken place with stakeholders in the justice sector.
-ENCL
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.