Contentious Bill to Extend Judges' Retirement Age Heads to Parliament
The Sri Lankan government is set to table a constitutional amendment Bill this week that would raise the mandatory retirement age of judges, a move that has drawn sharp opposition from legal bodies and political parties who argue it undermines the independence of the judiciary.
According to a media statement by Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara, the Bill will be presented on Tuesday, August 18, 2026. The proposed 22nd Constitution Amendment seeks to amend Article 107 of the Constitution to raise the retirement age of Supreme Court judges from 65 to 67 and Court of Appeal judges from 63 to 65. It also proposes raising the retirement age for High Court, District Courts and Magistrates' Courts judges to 62.
The amendment has been on Parliament's order book since August 18, with its second reading scheduled to take place once the Supreme Court delivers verdicts on petitions challenging its constitutionality.
The government, led by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, has justified the move as necessary to address a massive backlog of cases. Justice Minister Nanayakkara said the amendment would help address a backlog of approximately 1.1 million pending cases, expedite court proceedings, and ensure continuity by retaining experienced senior judges.
Opposition and Legal Fraternity Voice Concerns
The political opposition, legal fraternity, and sections of civil society are opposing the move, arguing it would impact judicial independence. Opposition leader Sajith Premadasa questioned in a social media post why the extension of the retirement age must apply to sitting judges.
The Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK), a prominent Tamil political party, called for a national referendum on the amendment. Following deliberations at ITAK's political committee, a statement said the proposed amendment concerns the sovereignty of the people and therefore needs to be placed before the public through a referendum.
Several opposition parties, which have challenged the constitutionality of the amendment, also seek a referendum in addition to a two-thirds majority in Parliament in their petitions.
The National People's Power (NPP) government has gone ahead with its parliamentary presentation despite opposition from the Bar Association of Sri Lanka, members of the Judicial Service Association, and the Commonwealth Lawyers Association. These bodies have dubbed the amendment a "direct assault" on the independence of the country's judiciary, stating that the executive president would be empowered to manipulate the judiciary's functioning.
Bar Association Meets President
A 20-member delegation of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) met President Dissanayake on August 12 to convey their concerns. The BASL emphasized that the proposed amendment would have a serious impact on the independence of the judiciary and that it should not be proceeded with, also pointing out several other urgent matters requiring the government's attention.
The President's office said Dissanayake stressed that the decision to extend the retirement age of judges was not taken with any individual or group in mind, but in the broader public interest. The President emphasized that the amendment is part of a broader reform programme aimed at addressing issues across the entire judicial system.
International Concerns
UN Special Rapporteur Margaret Satterthwaite has written to the government noting that the amendment may not be in line with international human rights standards related to the independence of the judiciary. She earlier warned that extending the tenure of sitting judges via an ad hoc change creates risks of executive and legislative interference.
The amendment now awaits Supreme Court rulings on the petitions challenging its constitutionality before its second reading in Parliament.