Cabinet approval to extend the judge's retirement age by 2 years

The Cabinet has approved a proposal to extend the retirement age of judges in Sri Lanka's entire judicial system, including the Supreme Court, by two years. This decision was made at the Cabinet meeting held on July 27, and the relevant proposal is scheduled to be presented to Parliament in the future.

This step, which has created a highly controversial situation regarding judicial independence and the constitution, has become a widely discussed topic in the legal field today.

According to Articles 107 and 108 of the current Constitution, Supreme Court judges retire at the age of 65, and Court of Appeal judges retire at 63. Furthermore, a limit of 61 years applies to High Court judges, and 60 years for District and Magistrate judges. According to the new proposal, the retirement age for Supreme Court judges is to be extended to 67, for Court of Appeal judges to 65, and similarly, the age for lower court judges will also be extended by two years. This would require a constitutional amendment to change the age limits for higher courts, while relevant acts would need to be amended for lower courts. Given the current two-thirds majority in Parliament, the government has the ability to pass this amendment.

The government, citing reasons for this amendment, points out that retaining the services of mature and experienced judges will contribute to the efficiency of the judicial system. Minimizing delays caused by the backlog of nearly 1.1 million cases currently before the courts in the country is also stated as a primary objective. Additionally, attention has been paid to increasing life expectancy, preventing the outflow of professional labor due to the current economic situation, and establishing a mechanism for promotions from lower courts to fill the four vacancies each in the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. There are also plans to appoint 50 new magistrates, and government parties, including the Minister of Justice and National Integration, Mr. Harshana Nanayakkara, emphasize that this will reduce case delays and enhance the efficiency of the judicial sector.

In the country's judicial system, there is a very low number of judges, only about 10 per million population, and the complete cycle of a criminal case typically takes more than 10 years, with some cases extending up to 20 years. Furthermore, the number of individuals held in remand custody has increased due to delays in the Government Analyst's Department.

However, this proposal is facing strong opposition from the legal fraternity and the opposition. The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) sent a letter to the President on May 25, stating that the public perceives this measure as an interference with the independence of the judiciary. The Judicial Service Association (JSA), representing District Judges and Magistrates, also unanimously expressed its opposition to this proposal in a secret ballot held on July 11. The association points out that several issues will arise due to the extension of the retirement age, such as a complete halt in promotions for two years, an extension of the time taken for promotion to the High Court from the current 12-17 years by another two years, an imbalance with the Attorney General's Department, and a lack of attraction for young lawyers to the judicial service.

Critics state that changing the retirement age is not the correct solution to the problems, instead of addressing the approximately 40% vacancies in the judicial system's support staff and infrastructure issues. International organizations such as the Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA) and LAWASIA also urge the government to abandon this proposal. Senior lawyers like Saliya Perera P.C., the Lawyers' Collective, and the opposition point out that this will be a black mark on the presidency of Mr. Anura Kumara Dissanayake, and that such constitutional amendments made without prior consultation directly affect judicial independence. With Cabinet approval, this amendment bill is scheduled to be presented to Parliament, and while steps are being taken to pass it with a two-thirds majority, various parties continue to call for further discussions and protests.