Buddhist clergy join lawyers in opposing Sri Lankas judges retirement age bill

^{File photograph.}

Sri Lankas Buddhist clergy have urged Anura Kumara Dissanayake not to proceed with a proposed constitutional amendment to extend the retirement age of judges, even as the Attorney General has cleared the draft legislation to advance.

The chief prelates of the Malwathu, Asgiriya, Ramanna and Amarapura Chapters have written to Sri Lankas president opposing the amendment, according to Bar Association of Sri Lanka President Rajeev Amarasuriya, who disclosed the intervention on Sunday after meeting the Mahanayake Thera of the Malwathu Chapter.

"I believe this Government has no moral right to proceed with this matter. The Mahanayake Thera informed us a short while ago that the chief prelates of the Malwathu, Asgiriya, Ramanna and Amarapura Chapters have written to the President stating that this constitutional amendment is unsuitable," Amarasuriya said.

The intervention of the Mahanayake Theras, who wield considerable political influence in Sinhala-Buddhist politics, marks a significant rebuke to a government that swept to power promising to restore the rule of law, and comes as the legislation moves closer to parliament.

Last week the Attorney General approved the draft bill, with the Attorney Generals Department confirming that its legal observations had been submitted to the Ministry of Justice. The ministry is now expected to finalise the bill before publishing it in the gazette, after the proposal was approved by the Cabinet. Under the amendment, the mandatory retirement age of Supreme Court judges would rise by two years to 67, that of Court of Appeal judges from 63 to 65, and lower court judges would receive a two-year extension. The change requires a two-thirds majority in parliament, which the governing National Peoples Power commands.

The government says the extension is intended to expedite the hearing and conclusion of pending cases, with more than 1.1 million awaiting resolution in courts across the island. Critics, however, contend that the amendment is a covert attempt to extend the tenure of Chief Justice Preethi Padman Surasena, who is due to retire later this year on reaching the age of 65, and who they say has been favourable to the Dissanayake administration, a characterisation the government denies.

The clergys letter adds to a wall of opposition from within the legal profession.

Last month, thousands of lawyers unanimously rejected the proposal at a special general meeting of the BASL, with Amarasuriya describing the move as "unethical", warning of its implications for judicial independence and calling for the matter to be put to a referendum. The Judicial Service Association, Presidents Counsel and several political parties had also objected before the Cabinet gave its approval.

A former president of the bar association, Saliya Peiris, has warned that the move would backfire, cautioning that it risked tainting Dissanayakes legacy and drawing a parallel with 2013, when then president Mahinda Rajapaksa impeached Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake under controversial circumstances and went on to lose an election two years later.

The Bar Association of Jaffna has likewise urged the president to abandon the amendment at this stage, warning that introducing such a change in isolation could create the perception of executive interference in the judiciary and undermine public confidence.