Sri Lanka’s 22nd Amendment has passed Parliament, extending superior court judges’ retirement ages and expanding the Court of Appeal.
COLOMBO — Parliament has passed the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, extending the retirement ages of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges and increasing the maximum number of judges serving on the Court of Appeal.
The Judicature (Amendment) Bill, which extends the retirement ages of judges in the High Court and other courts, was also approved following a two-day parliamentary debate.
According to the voting figures supplied to The Morning Telegraph, 158 MPs voted in favour and 63 voted against, giving the measures a majority of 95 votes.
The 22nd Amendment required the support of at least two-thirds of the full membership of Parliament. The Supreme Court had previously determined that the constitutional amendment did not require approval at a national referendum, subject to changes specified by the Court.
By contrast, the Supreme Court determined that the Judicature (Amendment) Bill was not inconsistent with the Constitution and could be enacted by a simple majority.
Retirement Ages Extended by Two Years
Under the 22nd Amendment, the retirement age of Supreme Court judges increases from 65 to 67, while Court of Appeal judges will retire at 65 instead of 63.
The constitutional amendment also changes the composition of the Court of Appeal by increasing the maximum number of judges, apart from its President, from 19 to 24.
Provisions relating to the Chief Justice were also included.
The original Bill stipulated that the Chief Justice would retire upon reaching 67 or after completing six years in that office, whichever occurred first. The Supreme Court subsequently determined that the six-year limitation should not apply to the person serving as Chief Justice when the amendment comes into operation.
The Judicature (Amendment) Bill separately extends by two years the retirement ages applicable to judges of the High Court, Magistrates’ Courts and other courts covered by the legislation. Parliament’s official record confirms that the Bill was introduced alongside the constitutional amendment for that purpose.
Amendment Faced Opposition Before Vote
The changes to judicial retirement ages had generated opposition before reaching the parliamentary vote.
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka publicly opposed the proposal to extend judges’ retirement ages, with BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya raising concerns about its potential implications for judicial independence.
The 22nd Amendment was also challenged before the Supreme Court. Among those who petitioned against it were the Centre for Policy Alternatives and its Executive Director, Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, who argued that the proposed change concerning superior court judges engaged constitutional protections relating to judicial independence.
On September 22, Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickramaratne announced the Supreme Court’s determination to Parliament.
The Court held that neither the Bill as a whole nor any of its provisions required approval at a referendum under Article 83 of the Constitution. It nevertheless directed amendments to the wording of Clause 2 and required the additional protection concerning the incumbent Chief Justice’s tenure.
With the parliamentary vote now concluded, the changes mark a significant alteration to the retirement framework governing Sri Lanka’s judiciary, extending judicial tenure across both the superior and lower courts while also expanding the permitted strength of the Court of Appeal.
