{
  "id": 153923,
  "title": "Sajith cites SC ruling requiring referendum for changes to retirement age of sitting SC, CA judges",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/08/05/sajith-cites-sc-ruling-requiring-referendum-for-changes-to-retirement",
  "topic": "tech",
  "section": "Tech",
  "published": "2026-08-05T00:05:08.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "The Island Sri Lanka",
    "slug": "the-island-sri-lanka",
    "url": "http://island.lk/sajith-cites-sc-ruling-requiring-referendum-for-changes-to-retirement-age-of-sitting-sc-ca-judges/"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "Sajith Premadasa, leader of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) party, argued in Parliament that any amendment to the retirement age of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges would necessitate a referendum, citing a 2022 Supreme Court ruling. The decision, delivered by Justices Buwaneka Aluwihare, PC, Murdu N.B. Fernando, PC, and Janak de Silva, emphasized that unlike other public officers, judges' retirement ages are constitutionally specified and any change could impinge on judicial independence, thus violating Article 3 of the Constitution. Premadasa urged the government to heed this ruling, countering claims that a referendum was unnecessary despite the SC's position. He noted that the government had previously justified the proposed amendment for improving judicial efficiency, a claim opposed by several legal organizations, including the Bar Association of Sri Lanka. Premadasa questioned why the government had not utilized a 2024 feasibility study identifying alternative reform priorities, and pointed out that the proposed amendment was rejected by judges by a 65-0 margin. He also requested details on the government's consultation with legal bodies and the performance indicators it intended to use for measuring reform success. Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara responded, asserting that the retirement age extension was part of a broader judicial reform program initiated by the current government, which included increasing court numbers and recruiting additional judges. He noted the government's adherence to the constitutional amendment process and its plans to present the proposed Bill to Parliament for First Reading.",
  "summary": "“2022 SC judgement holds that changing incumbent judges’ retirement ages adversely affects judicial independence” By Saman Indrajith SJB and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa yesterday told Parliament that a constitutional amendment seeking to extend the retirement age of Supreme Court judges would require people’s approval at a referendum. He cited a 2022 Supreme Court determination which, […]",
  "key_points": [
    "Sajith Premadasa argues referendum needed for retirement age changes, citing 2022 SC ruling.",
    "Government justified amendment for judicial efficiency, opposed by legal organizations.",
    "Justice Minister says retirement age extension part of broader judicial reform program."
  ],
  "editors_take": "The government's push to amend the retirement age of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges faces increased scrutiny after Sajith Premadasa cited a Supreme Court ruling requiring a referendum for such changes.",
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}