Colombo, Sri Lanka – On Thursday, a sizable crowd of opposition lawmakers, legal professionals, trade‑union members and civil‑rights activists assembled at the city’s central railway station to protest a proposed constitutional amendment that would increase the retirement age of the nation’s senior judges by two years and expand the number of seats on the highest courts.
Opposition claims the reform threatens independence
Speakers at the rally warned that the measure, introduced by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s National People’s Power (NPP) government, appears designed to give the ruling party greater control over the judiciary. Opposition parliamentarian Ajith Perera labeled the amendment “draconian,” arguing it was drafted without consulting judges, lawyers or other stakeholders and would allow political manipulation of the courts.
Critics also pointed to the timing of the proposal, noting that the NPP has held a two‑thirds majority in Parliament since the 2024 elections, giving it the power to pass constitutional changes without broader consensus.
Government defends the changes
In response, officials from the Dissanayake administration defended the amendment as a practical step toward reducing case backlogs and improving the efficiency of the legal system. They emphasized that the reforms would not compromise judicial independence, asserting that longer tenures would simply provide continuity and experience on the bench.
The government has not yet set a parliamentary debate date for the amendment, which requires a two‑thirds majority to pass. With the NPP already controlling more than the necessary threshold, opponents fear the vote could occur quickly and without meaningful public input.
Broader political context
President Dissanayake’s rise to power in September 2024 was widely interpreted as a rejection of the country’s entrenched political elite after the 2022 economic crisis, which many blamed on decades of mismanagement and corruption. Since taking office, his administration has launched investigations into alleged corruption by former officials, signaling a broader agenda of governmental reform.
Nevertheless, the judicial amendment has sparked a fresh wave of dissent, reflecting lingering concerns that the new leadership may be repeating patterns of centralized authority under the guise of reform.
What comes next?
Opposition leaders have vowed to continue pressuring the parliament to withdraw the proposal, urging the public to monitor the legislative process closely. They argue that any amendment affecting the judiciary must be crafted transparently and with input from the legal community to safeguard the rule of law.
As the debate unfolds, Sri Lankans will be watching to see whether the government’s reform agenda can balance efficiency gains with the essential independence of the courts.
Original reporting: Alexandria, VA News – WTOP News — read the source article.
