The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers has written to the Sri Lankan government raising concerns over the proposed constitutional amendment that would raise the retirement age of superior court judges.
Margaret Satterthwaite, who holds the UN mandate, issued an official communication to the President warning that the measure, if implemented in the form reported, could undermine judicial independence and public confidence in the judiciary.
Satterthwaite said the proposed amendment could affect the tenure of sitting judges and may raise concerns over interference by the executive and the legislature. Hiru News reported that her letter also points to a potential impact on the right to a fair trial.
The objection to retrospective effect
The central concern set out in the communication is that the change would not apply only to future appointments. As reported, the amendment would take effect simultaneously on the service periods of judges already on the bench — a feature the Rapporteur identified as problematic.
Under the current Constitution, Supreme Court judges retire at 65 and Court of Appeal judges at 63. The bill gazetted on August 7 would raise those ages by two years, to 67 and 65 respectively. Because both are fixed in the Constitution, the change requires a two-thirds majority in Parliament.
Satterthwaite urged the government to pursue any change to the judicial retirement age through a transparent, inclusive and consultative justice reform process, with appropriate safeguards to protect judicial independence.
A widening set of objections
The communication adds an international dimension to a dispute that has so far been domestic. The Bar Association of Sri Lanka has argued the amendment requires a referendum and, at a meeting with the President on Wednesday, urged that no decision be taken before broad expert consultation.
The proposal has also drawn objections from the Mahanayake Theras, the International Association of Judges and opposition parties.
Ada Derana published the Rapporteur’s statement in full. The government has not yet responded publicly to the communication.
