Sri Lanka is debating the controversial Twenty-Second Amendment to the Constitution to raise the retirement age of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges. The Anura Kumara Dissanayake Government defends the measure as a judicial-efficiency reform to clear case backlogs, while critics argue it threatens judicial independence. Sixty-seven petitions have challenged the Bill before a five-member Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice Preethi Padman Surasena.
Opponents, including the Bar Association of Sri Lanka and SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, contend that altering incumbent tenure requires a national referendum under the 2022 Inland Revenue ruling. This legislative test follows a cycle of 17th through 21st constitutional amendments that have repeatedly reshaped institutional checks on executive power. Civil society groups and Buddhist prelates have also voiced strong objections to the timing and implications of the proposed judicial restructuring.
Changing judicial retirement conditions through a parliamentary majority rather than a referendum mirrors structural disputes over the Seventeenth and Twentieth Amendments under previous administrations. The Supreme Court's adjudication of sixty-seven petitions before a five-member bench tests the judiciary's institutional resilience against a dominant legislative bloc. Altering tenure conditions for sitting judges without transitional exclusions sets a contentious benchmark for future executive-judicial relations.
No comments:
Post a Comment