The Bar Association of Sri Lanka has filed a petition challenging the proposed 22nd Constitutional Amendment, arguing that it requires both a two-thirds parliamentary majority and public referendum to be validly enacted.
A legal challenge has been mounted against the government's proposed 22nd Constitutional Amendment following its Cabinet approval and parliamentary presentation. The Bar Association of Sri Lanka, through its Treasurer T.M.S. Pasindu Silva and Assistant Secretary, filed the petition at the Supreme Court on grounds that the amendment's provisions necessitate enhanced procedural safeguards beyond standard parliamentary passage.
The petitioners contend that the amendment must secure approval from two-thirds of Members of Parliament and subsequently gain endorsement through a nationwide referendum. The government gazetted the amendment in early August, initiating the formal legislative process. Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara presented both the 22nd Constitutional Amendment Bill and an accompanying Judicature Amendment Bill to Parliament on August 18, notwithstanding earlier objections from various groups.
The substantive changes proposed involve extending judicial retirement ages. The 22nd Amendment would raise the retirement age for Supreme Court judges from 65 to 67 years and Court of Appeal judges from 63 to 65 years. The companion Judicature Bill proposes similar two-year extensions for judges in High Courts, District Courts, and Magistrates' Courts. The Supreme Court must now determine whether these constitutional changes fall within categories requiring heightened approval procedures, with a decision expected within three to 21 days of considering petitions.
Under established parliamentary procedure, the one-week interval following gazette notification provides a designated window for constitutional challenges before the Supreme Court. The Court's ruling will be decisive in determining which legislative pathway the amendment must follow to proceed.
