The Sri Lankan Supreme Court ruled that the 22nd Amendment, aimed at raising judges' retirement ages to clear a 1.1 million case backlog, does not require a public referendum. The legislative change will now move to Parliament. While the government cites efficiency, legal bodies are raising concerns about judicial independence, a factor often monitored by foreign investors tracking governance and economic stability.
The Supreme Court of Sri Lanka has cleared a major legal path for the government’s 22nd Amendment. Speaker Jagath Wickremaratna informed Parliament that the court determined the proposed changes do not need a national public referendum to become law. This ruling allows the legislation to proceed to a full vote in the 225-member Parliament, where the National People's Power coalition, led by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, holds a majority with 159 seats.
Proposed Changes and Objectives
The amendment package focuses on structural adjustments within the judicial system. Key proposals include raising the retirement age for Supreme Court judges from 65 to 67 years and for Court of Appeal judges from 63 to 65 years. The bill also seeks to increase the total number of appellate judges from 20 to 25, while setting the retirement age for lower court positions, such as High Court and Magistrate, at 62 years.
The government argues that these changes are necessary to tackle a massive administrative burden. Official data indicates that there are more than 1.1 million cases currently pending across the Sri Lankan court system. By retaining experienced judges for longer, the government expects to speed up case resolution and improve the overall efficiency of the legal process.
Governance and Investor Context
For investors and market observers, the stability of the judiciary is a key component of a country's ease of doing business and long-term economic predictability. Legal reforms are frequently watched closely by international institutions like the IMF, which often emphasize the importance of governance and institutional independence as part of economic recovery programs.
While the government frames the move as a functional update, it has encountered significant opposition. More than 60 petitions were filed to challenge the bill, with groups including the Bar Association of Sri Lanka and the Commonwealth Lawyers Association arguing that the tenure extensions could potentially allow the executive branch to exert more influence over judicial appointments. Critics contend that such structural changes, regardless of the court’s ruling on a referendum, carry long-term risks to judicial independence.
Investors looking at the region will likely track how these reforms affect institutional trust and whether the government can balance its goal of judicial efficiency with the need for independent oversight. The parliamentary vote will be the next major step to monitor, as the implementation of these changes will depend on the final legislative approval and subsequent administrative rollout.