President Anura Kumara Dissanayake's administration has advanced a proposal to raise the mandatory retirement age of judges by two years across all court levels, citing case backlogs and staffing shortages. The Bar Association of Sri Lanka and other legal bodies have mounted unified resistance, warning the measure…
The Sri Lankan government has moved forward with plans to extend the retirement ages of judges by two years across the judicial system, with Supreme Court judges retiring at 67 instead of 65, Court of Appeal judges at 65 instead of 63, and lower court judges seeing corresponding increases. The Cabinet has already approved the proposal, which requires a constitutional amendment for superior court judges and parallel legislative changes for the lower judiciary.
The administration frames the extension as a pragmatic solution to institutional challenges. Sri Lanka faces approximately 1.1 million pending court cases, with litigants sometimes waiting over a decade for resolution. Officials cite a shortage of experienced judicial officers, exacerbated by brain drain following the 2022 economic crisis. Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara has linked the proposal to a broader reform package including recruitment of additional judges and modernization of court processes.
However, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka representing over 26,000 attorneys has led strong opposition. At a special meeting attended by around 3,000 lawyers, members unanimously rejected the amendment in its current form. The BASL argues that altering the retirement ages of sitting judges creates a perception of executive interference in the judiciary, undermining public trust regardless of government intentions. The association contends that existing vacancies should be filled through normal constitutional processes rather than extending current judges' tenures. Critics also note the timing coincides with the impending retirement of Chief Justice Preethi Padman Surasena, though the government denies any individual targeting.
The dispute carries potential economic implications. Legal experts warn that perceived threats to judicial independence could raise investor risk assessments during Sri Lanka's post-default recovery period, particularly affecting sectors reliant on court enforcement. Conversely, genuine efficiency improvements could benefit commercial dispute resolution. International bodies including the Commonwealth Lawyers Association have expressed similar concerns about ad hoc constitutional changes, while opposition political parties and the Judicial Service Association have also voiced criticism.
