Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) senior figure Namal Rajapaksa has declared that any changes to the tenure of Supreme Court judges should not be decided by Parliament alone, but must instead be put to the people through a referendum.
Rajapaksa, who serves as a prominent voice within the opposition, made the remarks amid ongoing discussions surrounding proposed constitutional reforms that could affect the terms under which Sri Lanka's highest court judges serve.
A Question for the People
The former minister argued that altering the tenure of Supreme Court judges is a matter of significant constitutional weight, one that directly affects the independence of the judiciary and the democratic framework of the country. As such, he maintained, the decision cannot and should not rest solely with the legislature.
Such a fundamental change to the constitutional structure of Sri Lanka must be decided by the people themselves, not by a parliamentary majority alone.
Rajapaksa's position reflects a broader concern among some political circles that reforms touching on judicial independence require the highest level of democratic legitimacy — a threshold that only a public referendum can provide under Sri Lanka's constitutional provisions.
Constitutional Implications
Under the Sri Lankan Constitution, certain amendments require not only a two-thirds majority in Parliament but also approval by the people at a referendum. Critics and legal observers have long emphasised that any move to alter the structure or independence of the Supreme Court would fall squarely within that category.
The Supreme Court sits at the apex of Sri Lanka's judicial system, and its independence has historically been a subject of intense political debate. Any perceived attempt to weaken or manipulate the court's structure through legislative manoeuvring has typically drawn sharp public scrutiny.
Political Context
Rajapaksa's call comes at a time when the current administration is exploring a range of constitutional changes as part of its broader governance agenda. The SLPP, now in opposition, has positioned itself as a watchdog against what it characterises as overreach by the ruling party on matters of institutional reform.
Political analysts note that the debate over judicial tenure is likely to intensify in the coming weeks as Parliament takes up related reform discussions, with multiple parties expected to stake out firm positions on the issue.
💬 Join the Discussion 2
See what readers are saying — and add your view.
referendum for everything la, easier than fixing the actual problems no
exactly, distraction tactic only this