The Catholic Bishops' Conference in Sri Lanka (CBCSL) has called on the government to ensure thorough public and stakeholder consultation before moving forward with any constitutional amendment that would increase the statutory retirement age of judges. The statement, published on July 27, comes in response to a recent Cabinet decision proposing such a change, and signals growing concern among religious and civil society leaders about the transparency and democratic integrity of Sri Lanka's legislative process.
What the Catholic Bishops' Conference Said
In a formal statement addressing the Cabinet's proposal, the CBCSL expressed serious reservations about the speed and manner in which the government appears to be pursuing the constitutional amendment. The Bishops emphasized that any change to the retirement age of judges — a matter directly tied to the independence and functioning of the judiciary — must not be rushed through without meaningful dialogue with the public and relevant stakeholders.
The Conference made clear that their concern is not necessarily with the substance of the proposed change itself, but rather with the process being followed. In a functioning democracy, amendments to the constitution that affect fundamental institutions such as the judiciary demand broad consultation, transparency, and careful deliberation. The CBCSL stressed that bypassing these steps risks undermining public trust in both the government and the courts.
Why Judicial Retirement Age Matters
The retirement age of judges is far more than a technical or administrative detail. It sits at the heart of how a country manages judicial independence, institutional continuity, and accountability. In Sri Lanka, where the judiciary plays a critical role in upholding constitutional rights and checking executive power, any amendment that alters the terms of judicial service carries significant implications.
Raising the retirement age of judges could extend the tenure of sitting judges, potentially affecting the composition of key courts for years to come. Critics argue that such changes, if introduced without proper consultation, could be used to serve political interests rather than strengthen the justice system. Supporters, on the other hand, may argue that retaining experienced judges longer benefits the quality and consistency of judicial decisions.
Regardless of which argument holds more merit, the CBCSL's position is clear: the people of Sri Lanka and those directly affected by the justice system deserve a voice in this conversation before any amendment is enacted.
The Broader Context of Constitutional Reform in Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka has a complex and often turbulent history with constitutional reform. The country's constitution has been amended multiple times over the decades, sometimes in ways that have concentrated power in the executive branch or altered the balance between state institutions. This history makes civil society groups, religious organizations, and ordinary citizens particularly sensitive to changes that could shift power dynamics within the government.
The CBCSL's intervention reflects a broader pattern of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka taking an active role in advocating for good governance, democratic principles, and the protection of civil liberties. Religious institutions in the country have historically served as important voices of conscience, particularly during periods of political tension or when government decisions appear to lack adequate public oversight.
The timing of the Cabinet decision and the subsequent statement from the Bishops also comes at a moment when Sri Lanka is still navigating significant economic and political challenges following the crisis of recent years. Public confidence in government institutions remains fragile, making the manner in which constitutional changes are pursued especially important.
Calls for Transparency and Democratic Process
The CBCSL's statement is part of a wider chorus of voices urging the Sri Lankan government to uphold democratic norms when pursuing legislative or constitutional changes. Legal experts, civil society organizations, and opposition politicians have similarly raised questions about the consultation process surrounding the proposed amendment.
Adequate stakeholder consultation typically involves engaging with legal professionals, bar associations, judicial service commissions, opposition parties, civil society groups, and the general public. It also means allowing sufficient time for debate, review, and feedback before any vote or enactment takes place. The Bishops' call aligns with these standard democratic expectations and reinforces that constitutional changes should never be treated as routine administrative matters.
Transparency in this process would not only strengthen the legitimacy of the final decision but would also send a positive signal to the international community that Sri Lanka remains committed to democratic governance and the rule of law.
Conclusion
The Catholic Bishops' Conference in Sri Lanka has raised an important and timely concern. Whether or not raising the retirement age of judges is ultimately the right policy decision, the process through which it is pursued matters enormously. A constitutional amendment affecting the judiciary must be built on a foundation of public trust, open dialogue, and genuine stakeholder engagement. The CBCSL's call for adequate consultation before any such amendment proceeds is a principled stand in defense of democratic governance — and one that deserves serious attention from the government of Sri Lanka.