The Sri Lankan government has rejected concerns expressed by a United Nations Special Rapporteur regarding the proposed 22nd amendment to the constitution, which seeks to extend the retirement age of judges. In its response, submitted through Sri Lanka’s Permanent Mission in Geneva, the government maintained that the amendment is designed to enhance the judiciary’s capacity and efficiency, not to alter its composition for immediate institutional advantages.

The 22nd amendment aims to address longstanding challenges within Sri Lanka’s justice system, including significant case backlogs, delays in proceedings, and limited regional appellate jurisdiction. Officials emphasized that the extension of judges’ retirement ages is intended to preserve judicial expertise and institutional knowledge, thereby facilitating smoother judicial operations.

In June, Margret Satterthwaite, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, raised reservations about the proposed measure. She cautioned that applying extended retirement ages to current sitting judges, rather than limiting the change to future appointments, could undermine judicial independence and weaken the separation of powers principle. Her concerns highlighted the risk that the amendment might be perceived as a tool to influence the judiciary’s composition and potentially politicize the institution.

Responding to these points, the government reiterated its commitment to judicial independence and the rule of law, stating that no changes in the amendment bills are aimed at prolonging the tenure of specific judges or altering the judiciary’s makeup for short-term purposes. Instead, the government framed the retirement age extension as part of a broader strategy to improve access to justice, enhance administrative efficiency, and maintain a high standard of judicial performance through experienced personnel.

The government also noted that the constitutional and legal provisions in Sri Lanka include robust safeguards to protect judicial independence. It argued that the amendments should be understood within this context and that they are aligned with efforts to modernize and strengthen the judiciary to better serve the public.

Debate over the 22nd amendment continues within Sri Lanka, with legal experts and civil society groups monitoring its progress closely. The government insists that the reforms are necessary to address systemic challenges within the judicial system, while critics urge caution to ensure that changes do not compromise the fundamental principle of an independent and impartial judiciary.