Lawyers for Public Mandate, an organisation linked to the National People's Power, has defended the Government's proposed constitutional amendments to increase retirement ages for judges across multiple court levels, characterising the reforms as necessary to address judicial vacancies and court delays.
An organisation affiliated with the ruling National People's Power has publicly backed the Government's proposed judicial retirement age reforms, arguing they are designed to strengthen Sri Lanka's justice system rather than compromise judicial independence. At a media briefing, Lawyers for Public Mandate (LPM) rejected criticism of the constitutional amendment, asserting that politicians involved in unresolved corruption investigations were mischaracterising the reforms as a threat to the courts.
Under the Cabinet-approved proposal, the retirement age for Supreme Court judges would increase to 67 from 65, while Court of Appeal judges would retire at 65 instead of 63. High Court judges would reach retirement at 63 rather than 61, and Magistrates and District Judges would retire at 62 instead of 60. The Chief Justice would serve until age 67 or six years from appointment, whichever comes first. LPM cited comparative international practice, noting that judges in Australia, Denmark, and other nations work beyond the currently proposed Sri Lankan ages, while the United States has no mandatory retirement age for federal judges.
The organisation argued that extended tenures would help address chronic judicial shortages. According to LPM, although 110 High Court positions have been approved, only 93 are currently filled, contributing to court backlogs. The reforms form part of the Government's stated broader judicial and anti-corruption agenda. LPM maintained that the amendment targets no individual judge and criticised opposition voices for framing legitimate administrative changes as threats to judicial independence.
