Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) Member of Parliament Namal Rajapaksa has called for a national referendum to determine the tenure of Supreme Court judges, asserting that such a significant constitutional matter should be decided by the people rather than through parliamentary process alone.
A Question for the Public
Namal Rajapaksa argued that any changes to the tenure of Supreme Court judges would carry far-reaching consequences for the country's judiciary and its independence, making it essential that Sri Lankan citizens have a direct say in the outcome. He maintained that decisions of this magnitude should not be left solely in the hands of legislators.
The call comes amid ongoing discussions surrounding judicial reforms in the country, with various political stakeholders expressing differing views on how the tenure and appointment process for senior judges should be structured going forward.
Safeguarding Judicial Independence
Rajapaksa's position reflects broader concerns within certain political circles about preserving the integrity and independence of the Supreme Court. Supporters of a referendum argue that grounding such constitutional changes in a popular mandate would lend greater legitimacy to any reforms ultimately adopted.
Critics, however, may contend that constitutional amendments relating to the judiciary are precisely the kind of complex legal matters best handled through established parliamentary and legal channels, rather than put to a general public vote.
Political Context
The statement from the former minister adds another dimension to the ongoing political debate surrounding Sri Lanka's judicial framework. As the country continues to navigate a period of significant political transition, questions about the structure and accountability of key institutions — including the Supreme Court — have come increasingly to the fore.
No formal proposal for such a referendum has yet been tabled in Parliament, and it remains to be seen whether Namal Rajapaksa's call will gain traction among other political parties or generate wider public discussion in the weeks ahead.
💬 Join the Discussion 2
See what readers are saying — and add your view.
public deciding judge tenure? thats dangerous, courts must be independent
exactly, next thing politicians will campaign to remove judges they dont like