Namal Calls for Public Referendum Before Any Changes to Supreme Court Judges' Tenure
Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) MP Namal Rajapaksa has stated that any move to extend the tenure of Supreme Court judges must first receive the approval of the Sri Lankan public through a referendum, insisting that such a significant constitutional matter cannot be decided without the direct participation of the people.
A Question for the People
Namal, who is also the son of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, argued that changes affecting the country's highest court are not decisions that should be made solely by Parliament or the executive. He stressed that the judiciary's independence and its structural framework are matters of national importance that go beyond ordinary legislative action.
The proposal to extend the tenure of Supreme Court judges has sparked debate among legal experts, politicians, and civil society groups, with opinions divided on whether such a change would strengthen or undermine the independence of the judiciary.
Constitutional Implications
Under Sri Lanka's current constitutional framework, alterations to the structure and function of the Supreme Court typically require a higher threshold of approval compared to ordinary legislation. Critics of any tenure extension argue that without proper public consultation, such a move could be perceived as an attempt to influence the judiciary for political gain.
Namal's call for a referendum reflects a broader concern among opposition politicians that sweeping institutional changes should not be rushed through Parliament without broader democratic endorsement.
Any proposal to extend the tenure of Supreme Court judges should be decided by the people through a referendum, not by politicians alone.
Debate Continues
The discussion around judicial tenure reform comes at a time when Sri Lanka is navigating a period of significant political and economic transition. Observers note that the integrity and perceived independence of the judiciary remain critical to restoring public confidence in state institutions.
It remains to be seen whether the government will pursue the proposed changes and, if so, whether it will heed calls for a public referendum before doing so. Political analysts expect the debate to intensify as further details of any proposed legislative amendments emerge in the coming weeks.
💬 Join the Discussion 4
See what readers are saying — and add your view.
judges tenure change is serious thing, referendum is correct way to do it
referendum costs crores. who paying for that?
finally someone saying the ppl should decide. good point namal
namal saying this now only. where was he when his father was doing everything without asking anyone