The Sri Lanka Railway Station Masters’ Association has declared full support for the Bar Association of Sri Lanka’s position on the proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, arguing that defending judicial independence is a duty of the whole of civil society rather than of lawyers alone.
In a statement issued on Friday, the SLRSMA said it had closely followed both the BASL’s stance and the legal and constitutional steps the association is taking over the amendment.
”Not a routine administrative amendment”
The association said changes to the tenure or retirement age of superior court judges cannot be treated as routine administrative housekeeping. The procedure used to introduce such changes, their timing, the sitting officeholders to whom they would apply, and their potential effect on public confidence in the judiciary must all be weighed “with the utmost caution”, it said.
It argued that in a democratic state it is essential not only that justice is done but that the public can plainly see it being administered independently, impartially and free of external influence. When the legal framework governing judges’ tenure is altered, the statement said, it is imperative that no doubt — and no precedent — is created that could damage that trust.
The association acknowledged that delays, case backlogs and efficiency problems in the courts are real and need solutions. But remedies for administrative or systemic problems, it said, should not be applied in a way that undermines the institutional independence of the judiciary or public confidence in it.
It added that a democratic society must leave room for judicial decisions to be criticised and for shortcomings in the court system to be questioned lawfully, provided remedies are pursued through established constitutional and legal procedures.
A new voice in the dispute
The SLRSMA said it supports the BASL’s principled position on safeguarding judicial independence, the rule of law, the sovereignty of the people and Sri Lanka’s democratic constitutional values, and backs the “reasonable measures” the BASL has taken within the constitutional framework.
The statement stressed that the issue “is not one affecting the legal community alone”, but a matter of national importance touching the rights, freedoms and future democratic governance of all citizens. The association said it had taken the position not on behalf of any individual, institution or political party, but in defence of an independent judiciary and popular sovereignty.
The intervention widens the dispute beyond the legal profession. The BASL has raised concerns over the amendment and called for responsible scrutiny of the judiciary, and thirteen petitions — both for and against — are now before the Supreme Court. A government MP has separately intervened against the BASL’s own petition.
Ada Derana and Hiru News carried the statement in substantially identical terms.
