22A: The die is cast?

Wednesday’s meeting between President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) delegation seemingly offered little in the way of meaningful dialogue on the contentious 22nd Amendment (22A) to the Constitution, which aims to extend mandatory retirement ages for Supreme Court (SC) and Court of Appeal (CA) judges.

The government's intention to proceed with 22A was communicated forcefully, eliciting a strong reaction from BASL. The President’s Office provided a video clip of the President's remarks, but BASL representatives insisted on maintaining their stance, urging the President to abandon the amendment. BASL's concerns have been well-publicized, and the public may have anticipated the President to address their arguments with evidence and logical reasoning.

However, the President, instead, seemed to play the victim, faulting the BASL for issuing a media statement ahead of the meeting. He claimed to have planned to attend the meeting with an open mind, but the BASL's statement undermined his credibility.

The President argued that opponents of 22A had exaggerated the issue and shifted blame to other critics. He appealed to emotions, likening his willingness to take risks in amending the Constitution to those of his predecessors. This tactic of comparing himself to a hero pursuing a just cause was further bolstered by mentioning the commencement of investigations into the Easter Sunday terror attacks during his tenure. However, a BASL official countered that such risks regarding judicial independence were not worth taking.

The government downplayed the notion that 22A was intended to benefit a single individual, emphasizing that it was in the interest of the judiciary. However, the discerning public would find it difficult to accept the President's assertion without evidence. Opposition figures have argued that the government could effectively silence its critics by delaying 22A until a particular judge turns 65 and retires, allowing for a consultative process with all stakeholders.

For a government eager to delay Provincial Council elections, postponing a highly criticized constitutional amendment may serve an ulterior motive.

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Margaret Satterthwaite, criticized 22A, echoing the views of influential international organizations like the International Association of Judges, the Commonwealth Lawyers' Association, LAWASIA, and the French National Bar Council. Satterthwaite urged President Dissanayake to refrain from undermining judicial independence and credibility.

It appears that the government's presentation of 22A to Parliament may prove to be an exercise in futility, as reason may be futile against a government intoxicated with power.