Changing the retirement age of judges of the Superior Courts is not simply a question of extending careers. It is a decision that could have profound consequences for the administration of justice and for some of the country’s most closely watched cases.
President Anura Kumara Dissanayake faces several competing challenges. Among them is the reality that several major cases are already well underway before benches constituted under the present judicial framework.
If senior judges retire while lengthy hearings remain incomplete, newly constituted benches may, depending on the circumstances and the applicable law, be required to revisit significant portions of the proceedings. In complex litigation, particularly constitutional and public interest matters, this can result in substantial delay.
Few cases illustrate the sensitivity of this issue more than the continuing litigation arising from the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks. The victims’ families have already endured years of waiting. Any procedural development that further postpones the delivery of justice is likely to attract intense public scrutiny.
For President Dissanayake, the issue is particularly significant. Throughout his political campaign he repeatedly pledged that those responsible for wrongdoing under previous administrations would be held accountable through lawful and independent processes. The public expectation surrounding those commitments remains high.
That places the Government in a delicate position. On the one hand, there may be sound institutional arguments for retaining experienced judges for longer.
On the other, any reform must be weighed against the possibility of disrupting ongoing proceedings, delaying judgments and inadvertently undermining public confidence in the justice system.
The challenge therefore is not merely whether judges should serve for longer. It is whether any change can be implemented in a manner that preserves continuity, protects litigants from unnecessary delay and strengthens rather than weakens confidence in the courts.
Ultimately, the measure of any reform will not be the additional years judges remain on the Bench, but whether justice continues to be delivered efficiently, independently and without interruption.
On that question, the Government will be judged as carefully as the judiciary itself.
