The phrase "court packing" may conjure images of Washington power struggles, but Sri Lanka has its own long and troubled history of political interference in the judiciary — a pattern that critics argue has repeatedly undermined the independence of the country's highest courts.
A Familiar Playbook
Across successive administrations, Sri Lankan governments have employed a range of tactics to shape the composition and conduct of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. From the timing of judicial appointments to the strategic use of constitutional provisions, the tools available to the executive have rarely gone unused.
Political observers note that the practice is neither new nor confined to any single party. Both the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, as well as governments backed by the United National Party, have at various points faced allegations of attempting to influence judicial outcomes through the appointment process.
Why Judicial Independence Matters
The Supreme Court of Sri Lanka sits at the apex of the country's legal system, holding powers of judicial review and the authority to interpret the Constitution. When questions arise about whether its members owe their positions to political favour, the legitimacy of its rulings inevitably comes into question.
Legal professionals and civil society groups have repeatedly raised alarm over what they describe as a structural weakness: the concentration of appointment powers in the hands of the executive, with insufficient checks from Parliament or an independent oversight body.
Calls for Reform
Reformists have long advocated for a transparent, merit-based appointment process, similar to models adopted in other Commonwealth nations. Proposals have included the establishment of a fully independent judicial appointments commission, public hearings for nominees, and fixed, non-renewable terms for Supreme Court justices to insulate them from political pressure.
Despite periodic promises of constitutional reform, meaningful change to the appointments process has proved elusive, often stalling when the very political forces that benefit from the status quo are asked to dismantle it.
The independence of the judiciary is not merely a legal principle — it is the foundation upon which public trust in the entire system of governance rests.
A Test for the New Administration
With Sri Lanka navigating a critical period of economic and political transition following the upheaval of recent years, the question of judicial integrity has taken on renewed urgency. Citizens and international partners alike will be watching closely to see whether the current administration chooses to entrench old habits or move decisively toward a judiciary that is, and is seen to be, genuinely independent.
For now, the debate over court composition remains one of the more quietly consequential battles in Sri Lankan public life — one that rarely makes front-page news, but shapes the country's democratic health in ways that are difficult to overstate.
💬 Join the Discussion 2
See what readers are saying — and add your view.
nothing new men, politicians always do this. courts are just another tool for them
exactly, remember how many CJ removals we had? shameless