United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur Margaret Satterthwaite has raised concerns over the proposal in the 22nd amendment to the constitution to increase the retirement age of Sri Lanka’s superior court judges.
In a formal communication dated August 7, 2026 and sent to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, Satterthwaite highlighted that the proposal raises serious questions regarding judicial independence and the rule of law.
Satterthwaite, who as Special Rapporteur is an independent expert to the UN on the independence of judges and lawyers, has requested the government to clarify its rationale and the safeguards in place to prevent political interference.
Background
The proposed 22nd amendment to the Constitution seeks to increase the retirement age of Supreme Court judges from 65 to 67 years.
Similarly, the mandatory retirement age for Court of Appeal judges would be extended from 63 to 65 years under the plan.
Despite strong criticism, the government gazetted the amendment last Friday (August 7) and has defended it by stating that it was a necessary reform to address the backlog of 1.1 million cases in Sri Lanka’s court system.
Concerns
A primary concern raised in the report is that the amendment would immediately affect sitting judges rather than taking effect with future appointees.
The report noted that extending terms without prospective application could prolong the mandates of specific members of the superior courts
The Special Rapporteur emphasized that modifying the tenure of active judges through an ad hoc amendment risks giving rise to executive and legislative interference.
Under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), states are legally bound to guarantee a fully independent and impartial tribunal, her report asserted.
The UN rapporteur also warned that the absence of transitional safeguards increases the perception that the amendment serves immediate institutional purposes.
Furthermore, the proposal fails to address potential conflicts of interest if sitting judges are required to rule on the constitutionality of their own extensions.
Recommendations
She recommended that any adjustments to the judicial retirement age be pursued through a transparent, inclusive, and comprehensive reform process.
Ad hoc changes made without proper consultation risk eroding public confidence in the overall administration of justice, the communication noted.
Additionally, the UN requested details on impact assessments and measures taken to safeguard public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary.
Comments
Moderated before publishing. Your email stays private.