Cabinet Clears Path for Two-Year Extension of Judges Retirement Age
The Government has taken one of its most consequential decisions affecting the judiciary in recent years, with Cabinet approving proposals that would extend the retirement age of judges across Sri Lanka’s courts by two years.
The move, if ultimately enacted through the necessary constitutional and legislative changes, would increase the retirement age of Supreme Court judges from 65 to 67 years, Court of Appeal judges from 63 to 65 years and is also expected to extend the service of judges in the High Court, District Courts and Magistrates’ Courts.
While the Government has justified the proposal on grounds including judicial experience, delays in case disposal and the need to retain senior judges for longer, the decision has already generated considerable debate both within the legal profession and beyond.
The proposal comes against a backdrop of persistent vacancies within the higher judiciary and mounting concern over delays in the administration of justice. Ministers have argued that retaining experienced judges could provide greater continuity while new appointments gradually fill the gaps.
However, critics argue that the issue extends far beyond administrative convenience. Questions are already being asked about whether the proposal could affect the timing of appointments to the superior courts, alter the composition of benches hearing constitutional matters and influence the progression of several cases of considerable national importance.
Among the issues attracting attention are proceedings relating to the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks, constitutional challenges and other litigation involving the State, where continuity of judicial panels can have practical implications for the pace at which matters are concluded.
The proposal has also prompted opposition from sections of the legal community.
Both the Bar Association of Sri Lanka and the Judicial Service Association have previously expressed reservations regarding the extension, arguing that any change affecting judicial tenure must be approached with exceptional care in order to preserve public confidence in judicial independence.
The Government, for its part, maintains that the proposal is driven by institutional needs rather than personalities and says increasing life expectancy and the growing complexity of litigation justify retaining experienced judges for a longer period.
Cabinet approval does not itself alter the retirement age. Constitutional amendments will be required in relation to the superior courts, while amendments to ordinary legislation will be necessary for the lower judiciary before the proposal can take effect.
For President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s administration, the decision represents one of the most significant constitutional reforms it has undertaken since assuming office.
Whether the proposal ultimately strengthens the administration of justice or raises new constitutional questions is likely to dominate legal and political debate in the weeks ahead.
