President says change cannot happen without risk

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has defended the Government’s proposed 22nd Constitutional Amendment, insisting that the legislative reform is intended to strengthen the administration of justice and that meaningful institutional change cannot be achieved without taking risks.

The President made the remarks during a nearly hour-long meeting with a 24-member delegation of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL), led by its President Rajeev Amarasuriya, at the Presidential Secretariat.

The BASL reiterated its strong opposition to the proposed amendment, particularly the plan to extend the retirement age of judges of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal. The association argued that changing the retirement age would not by itself contribute to reducing case backlogs or improving the efficiency of the judiciary.

The BASL also raised concerns over the potential impact of the proposed changes on judicial independence and questioned the basis for recent judicial appointments and promotions where seniority has reportedly been weighed against broader “merit” considerations.

President Dissanayake rejected allegations that the Government was seeking to interfere with the judiciary or extend its political influence through the amendment. He said the proposed change was part of a wider programme of reforms aimed at improving the justice system.

The President also stressed that improving the efficiency of the judicial system was not the responsibility of the judiciary alone, arguing that other institutions, including the executive, also have a role to play.

Responding to concerns that the Government could be seeking to manipulate the courts or prolong its hold on power, Dissanayake said he had no intention of acting beyond the limits set by the Constitution.

“I do not believe change can happen without risk,” he said, according to those familiar with the discussions, while indicating that he was prepared to face political consequences in pursuing institutional reforms.

The meeting ended without agreement on the proposed amendment, with the BASL maintaining its opposition. However, the association said it remained hopeful that the Government would engage in broader consultations with legal professionals and academics.