BASL urges President not to raise retirement age of Superior Court Judges

Colombo, June 03 (Daily Mirror) - The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL), one of the country's largest professional bodies, has called on President Anura Kumara Dissanayake not to proceed with any proposed constitutional amendment aimed at increasing the retirement age of members of the judiciary, including judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal.

In a letter addressed to the President, the BASL expressed grave concern over reports that the Government is considering amending the Constitution to extend the retirement age of judges serving in the country’s apex courts.

The BASL maintained that the retirement ages of judges of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, fixed at 63 and 65 years respectively since the promulgation of the 1978 Constitution, should not be altered arbitrarily.

The BASL argued that such a change is neither necessary nor desirable and could undermine public confidence in the judiciary and the Government’s commitment to safeguarding judicial independence and the rule of law.

The BASL warned that the public may question the motives behind a constitutional amendment introduced solely for the purpose of extending judicial tenure. It further observed that the number of judges in both superior courts had already been substantially increased through the 20th Amendment to the Constitution in 2020, raising the Court of Appeal bench from 12 to 20 judges and the Supreme Court from 11 to 17 judges.

According to the BASL, these increases have adequately strengthened the courts’ capacity, leaving no genuine work-related justification for extending the retirement ages of judges.

The BASL also observed that any alteration to judicial retirement ages would require a constitutional amendment and cautioned against further ad hoc changes to the Constitution. It maintained that Sri Lanka’s Constitution has frequently been amended to meet the political needs of successive governments, often at the expense of the rule of law and judicial independence.

The BASL stressed that extending the retirement age of sitting judges at this juncture could be perceived as a direct attempt to influence the judiciary. Such a move, it said, would not only erode public trust but could also be viewed as an affront to the dignity of the judges concerned.

Warning of long-term consequences, the BASL said the proposed amendment could set a dangerous precedent, enabling future governments to introduce similar constitutional changes affecting the judiciary for political purposes.

“The independence of the judiciary and the public confidence reposed in it are indispensable pillars of the rule of law and the democratic framework of our Republic,” the BASL stated.

It emphasized that the judiciary must not only be independent in fact but also be seen as wholly independent, impartial, and free from any perception of influence or impropriety.

The BASL said it was compelled to voice its concerns in fulfilment of its duty to uphold the rule of law and protect judicial independence, reiterating that the proposed amendment would serve neither the interests of the judiciary nor those of the public.

The BASL’s letter was signed by its President, Rajeev Amarasuriya and Secretary Nalin De Silva.