Govt. crosses the Rubicon
Monday 10th August, 2026 The proposed constitutional amendment to effect a blanket extension of judges’ retirement ages is a textbook example of pretextual legislation or constitutional camouflage. It is a fig leaf for the government’s original objective of retaining one particular judge who is nearing the mandatory retirement age. Legal experts are of the considered […]
On Monday, 10th August, 2026, the Sri Lankan government unveiled a proposed constitutional amendment aimed at extending the retirement age for judges. The amendment is seen as a pretext by legal experts, who argue that its real purpose is to keep a specific judge on the bench, as he is nearing the mandatory retirement age. The proposed legislation must be approved both by Parliament, which would require a two-thirds majority, and by the people via a referendum.
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka and the International Association of Judges have both voiced their concerns over the amendment, stressing that the judiciary must maintain its independence, impartiality, and freedom from any appearance of impropriety. The government's move could potentially lead to a quid pro quo situation, given the involvement of past political figures in crucial cases such as the Easter Sunday terror attacks.
The government's actions have also drawn criticism from the Commonwealth Lawyers' Association and LAWASIA. International observers, including the IAJ, warn that the timing and manner of the proposal's introduction are problematic, as they could undermine the independence of Sri Lanka's judiciary and potentially impact its global standing.
Written by urgent.news from The Island Sri Lanka's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
