28 August 2026
The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) and its Executive Director, Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, have filed a petition before the Supreme Court seeking a determination that Clause 2 of the Bill titled the “Twenty Second Amendment to the Constitution” is inconsistent with Article 3 of the Constitution and therefore requires approval by the People at a referendum.
The Bill, published in the Gazette on 7th August 2026, seeks to amend Article 107(5) of the Constitution, which presently provides that Judges of the Supreme Court retire at the age of 65 and Judges of the Court of Appeal at the age of 63. The proposed amendment would increase these retirement ages to 67 and 65, respectively.
The petition challenges the proposed changes on the basis that the independence of the judiciary is a foundational principle of Sri Lanka’s constitutional order and is protected by Article 3 read with Article 4 of the Constitution. The Petitioners rely on a string of authorities from the Supreme Court including, the Supreme Court’s determination in In re Inland Revenue Amendment Bill (SC SD 64–71/2022), in which the Court held
“…Any Constitutional amendment to the retirement age or the period of office impacting on incumbent judges, whether directly or indirectly, will impinge on theindependence of the judiciary and violative of Article 3 which requires a Referendum.”
The Petitioners concerns are also informed by the legal precedent that this would create which could enable the current or any future government to reduce the age of retirement of judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, hence the Petitioners argue that the need for a referendum is an essential pre condition to ensure judicial independence.
The Petitioners further contend that the circumstances surrounding the proposed amendment raise a fundamental constitutional concern because the judges of the Supreme Court are being called upon to determine a matter that directly affects them. The petition therefore invokes the foundational public law principle of nemo judex in causa sua — that no person should be a judge in their own cause.
The Petitioners accordingly seek a determination from the Supreme Court that Clause 2 of the Bill is inconsistent with Article 3 of the Constitution and can only be enacted in accordance with Article 83, requiring both the requisite special majority in Parliament and approval by the People at a referendum.
The petition emphasises that the issue is not simply one concerning the retirement age of judges, but concerns the constitutional protection of judicial independence, separation of powers and the sovereignty of the People