A high-level meeting is scheduled to take place at the Presidential Secretariat on the evening of June 1 between Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and the Judicial Officers’ Association, during which a controversial proposal to extend the retirement age of judges serving in higher courts is expected to be presented. The proposal, according to informed sources, includes provisions that would affect the Chief Justice and other senior judicial officers, and is likely to become a focal point of discussion at the meeting.
The Judicial Officers’ Association, which represents judges of the High Court, District Court, and Magistrate’s Court, is also expected to raise broader concerns regarding salaries, allowances, and other professional issues affecting the judiciary. The delegation will be led by its Chairman, Fort Magistrate Pasan Amarasena, along with other officials, while Judicial Service Commission Secretary Prasanna de Alwis is also expected to be present for the discussions.
The meeting takes place against the backdrop of ongoing sensitivity surrounding the functioning of the Judicial Service Commission, the constitutional body responsible for appointments, promotions, transfers, disciplinary control, and dismissal of judges in higher and lower courts. The Chief Justice serves as its ex officio chairman, while the next two senior-most Supreme Court judges are appointed by the President as members. Recently, one long-vacant position in the Commission was filled following criticism from the legal community, with the appointment of senior Supreme Court judge Yasantha Kodagoda.
According to reports, the retirement age extension proposal—while expected to be framed broadly as applying to all higher court judges—has raised speculation that its primary intent may be to retain the current Chief Justice in office for an additional two years. Under existing arrangements, Preethi Padman Surasena is due to retire in December unless constitutional changes are made to extend the mandatory retirement age.
Legal experts and judicial observers have expressed concern over the reported move, warning that any attempt to alter retirement limits for selective benefit could set a troubling precedent for judicial independence. The current constitutional framework sets retirement at 65 years for Supreme Court judges and 63 years for Court of Appeal judges, meaning any extension would require a formal constitutional amendment. Critics argue that recent developments highlight increasing tensions between executive decision-making and the autonomy of the judiciary in Sri Lanka.
