President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has defended the proposed judicial reforms and constitutional amendment, saying they are intended to bring about systemic change in the judiciary rather than provide privileges to individual judges.
Addressing concerns raised by representatives of the legal community, the President said one of the considerations behind the Government’s approach was preventing disruption to the ongoing Easter Sunday attacks case, which involves 23,000 charges and around 3,000 witnesses.
He said the case was now in its final stages and carried significant public expectations for justice.
The President explained that the most senior High Court judge currently serves on the three-member Trial-at-Bar hearing the case and would ordinarily be in line for appointment to the Court of Appeal.
According to Dissanayake, appointing the judge to the Court of Appeal at this stage could affect the continuation of the trial, while delaying his appointment could also disadvantage the judge professionally.
He said this was among the factors he had considered when dealing with existing judicial vacancies.
“I could have simply allowed the Easter Sunday case to collapse. There are 23,000 charges and 3,000 witnesses. Who would hear this case next? Who would come and hear it all over again? When would justice be delivered to the people?” the President asked.
Dissanayake strongly rejected suggestions that vacancies had deliberately been kept open until particular individuals became eligible for appointment.
He said the Government was attempting to balance the need to complete a case of major national importance with the career progression of judges involved in it.
The President also rejected allegations that the proposed constitutional changes were intended to provide special privileges to selected judges.
He argued that almost any reform involving the judiciary could be portrayed as benefiting particular individuals, pointing to the previous increase in the number of Supreme Court judges from 11 to 17 and Court of Appeal judges from 12 to 20.
According to the President, those increases could similarly have been interpreted as an attempt to appoint selected individuals to the superior courts.
He said his objective was therefore to design reforms that were not centred on any particular individual.
“This is not a change targeting individuals. This is a systemic change,” he said, adding that the objective was to transform the judicial system from its present position rather than grant privileges to particular judges.
Dissanayake also said he would exercise his powers strictly within the Constitution and would not use executive authority beyond constitutional limits.
Responding to concerns over the political risks associated with the proposed constitutional amendment, the President said he was prepared to leave office if that became a consequence of pursuing reforms he believed were necessary.
He cited the ongoing investigation into the Easter Sunday attacks as an example of the risks he was prepared to take.
The President said intelligence agencies involved in the investigation were also responsible for his personal security, but he had nevertheless allowed the investigation to proceed despite recognising that it could carry risks to his life.
“I do not believe change can be achieved without taking risks. I am prepared to take that risk on behalf of the people of this country. If I lose my position because of it, I am prepared to accept that and leave,” he said.
Turning to the wider justice system, Dissanayake said judicial reform could not be considered in isolation from weaknesses in investigations, prosecutions and court infrastructure.
He said the Government intended to strengthen the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC), which currently operates from a single location in Colombo.
The Government plans to establish 24 CIABOC branches or offices across the country, while approval has already been granted to recruit 373 officers.
The President said approval had also been granted to provide investigation officers with salaries above the ordinary public service salary structure in an effort to attract and retain capable investigators.
He said strengthening investigations was essential if cases were to move through the justice system more efficiently.
Dissanayake also highlighted serious manpower shortages within the Police.
According to the President, although the approved Police cadre stands at 102,000, only around 72,000 officers are currently serving. Of them, approximately 4,000 are unable to perform regular uniformed duties due to medical reasons, leaving about 68,000 officers to perform the work intended for a force of 102,000.
He said police officers were working exceptionally long hours and the Government planned to recruit another 10,000 personnel while also improving uniforms and providing technological equipment needed for their duties.
The President said lengthy investigations were one of the major causes of delays in the justice system and argued that investigative institutions had to be strengthened before improvements could be expected at the prosecution and trial stages.
He also acknowledged problems within the Attorney General’s Department, particularly the departure of skilled and experienced legal officers.
Approval has been granted to recruit 50 new officers to the department, while discussions have begun on reforming its promotion system.
Dissanayake said the Government was also considering increasing allowances available to legal officers, including those handling corporate litigation.
He argued that competitive remuneration was necessary to retain experienced and capable lawyers within the Attorney General’s Department.
According to the President, these reforms were intended to strengthen the entire process before cases reached the courts.
Turning specifically to the proposed constitutional amendment, Dissanayake said he believed such reforms should have been introduced when the 20th Amendment increased the number of judges in the superior courts.
He noted that the number of Supreme Court judges was increased from 11 to 17, while the number of Court of Appeal judges rose from 12 to 20.
The President argued that if six Court of Appeal judges had been elevated to fill the additional Supreme Court positions, that alone would have created six vacancies in the Court of Appeal. Combined with the eight new positions created by expanding the Court of Appeal from 12 to 20 judges, as many as 14 appointments would have been required.
He said reforms aimed at retaining experienced judges should have been considered at that stage.
However, Dissanayake rejected the idea of selectively extending the tenure of judges based on assessments of their performance.
He said selecting individual judges on the basis that they wrote better judgments could itself amount to improper interference because someone would have to decide which judges qualified for such treatment.
While an objective evaluation mechanism could theoretically be considered, the President said he was not convinced such a system would adequately protect judicial independence.
For that reason, he said the Government preferred a system-wide reform rather than an arrangement applying selectively to particular judges.
Dissanayake also outlined plans to expand the Court of Appeal.
While there were no plans to increase the number of Supreme Court judges, the Government intends to increase the number of Court of Appeal judges by four.
He said the Constitution already allowed the Court of Appeal to sit at provincial level without dividing its jurisdiction, and he had asked the relevant Minister to discuss with the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) how this provision could be implemented.
Under the proposal, the Court of Appeal would remain a central court but could periodically sit in the provinces.
The additional four judges would help provide the judicial capacity required for such sittings, while the Government would provide the necessary infrastructure.
The President also said a substantial backlog had accumulated in the High Courts.
The Government has identified around 10 districts where additional High Courts are required, while the JSC had identified approximately 11 locations.
Dissanayake said the Government had decided to establish around 11 new High Courts, including in areas such as Kurunegala.
As a result, the number of High Court judges would also have to increase, and the Government had decided to raise the number from 110 to 120.
The President rejected claims that the proposed reforms would effectively freeze judicial promotions and appointments for two years.
While appointments to the Supreme Court could be affected, he said new Court of Appeal positions would be filled as the court expanded, while additional High Court judges would be appointed as new High Courts were established.
This would also allow promotions from the lower judiciary to continue, he said.
Dissanayake also addressed the backlog in Magistrates’ Courts, saying the JSC was currently working to recruit 50 judges.
However, he stressed that the Executive would not interfere with the JSC’s recruitment decisions.
If the body responsible for recruitment determined that only 32 candidates met the required standard, the President said he could not order it to recruit 33 or insist that all 50 vacancies be filled.
“That would be improper interference,” he said, arguing that allowing the relevant body to determine who met the required standard was itself part of judicial independence.
The President said the Government was also considering the broader challenge of retaining professionals in the public sector.
He cited the decision to increase the retirement age of doctors from 60 to 63, initially for specialists and subsequently for other doctors, as an example of measures taken to retain experienced professionals.
Similar consideration had to be given to retaining experienced personnel within the judiciary, he said.
Dissanayake said judges faced several practical problems, including issues relating to housing and deductions associated with official accommodation.
He pledged to address these issues through the Budget, with some measures expected even before its presentation.
The judicial sector also faces a shortage of around 1,007 support staff.
Approval has already been granted to recruit approximately 260 employees, while the Government intends to fill the remaining vacancies.
The President said around 21,000 applications had been received for the initial 260 positions, meaning recruitment would have to proceed through formal competitive examinations or interviews rather than simply filling the vacancies administratively.
He also pledged funding to complete partially constructed court buildings around the country.
Apart from two projects affected by unresolved disputes with contractors, the Government intends to allocate funds to complete unfinished court buildings.
The judiciary has also requested around 11 additional court facilities, some of which currently operate from rented premises, and the Government intends to allocate funds towards constructing at least some of them.
Dissanayake also highlighted the digitalisation of the court system as another component of the reform programme.
He said he had personally instructed officials from the Digital Ministry to engage with the JSC on accelerating the process.
According to the President, significant progress had been made in relation to the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, where systems were at the testing stage, although implementation in the lower courts remained less advanced.
He stressed that the proposed constitutional amendment should therefore not be viewed simply as an attempt to extend the tenure of judges.
Instead, he described it as one element of reforms covering investigations, prosecutions, judicial capacity, court infrastructure, staffing and digitalisation.
The President acknowledged concerns that the proposed changes could create a perception that certain judges were receiving special treatment.
However, he argued that the judiciary had faced controversies and questions over public perception in the past without completely losing public confidence.
“People still have confidence in this judicial system. I also have confidence in this judicial system,” he said.
Dissanayake reiterated that the reforms were intended to achieve systemic rather than individual change.
He said arguments over whether reforms should take effect before or after a particular date shifted the debate away from policy and towards the identities of individual judges.
The President said he did not personally know many of the judges who could be affected by the proposed changes and had no close relationships with many of those serving at the higher levels of the judiciary.
He maintained that the Government’s objective was to change the system rather than benefit particular individuals.
Dissanayake also pushed back against warnings that the proposed amendment would cause a major breakdown in the judiciary or completely destroy public confidence in the courts.
While acknowledging the right of critics to oppose the reforms, he said public campaigns sometimes pushed arguments beyond their strict logical limits in order to generate opposition.
He said claims that future court decisions could be viewed as compromised because a judge had benefited from the reforms were among the arguments being raised in the wider public debate.
The President distinguished such claims from the concerns formally presented by representatives of the legal community, saying their arguments had been presented rationally while some of the wider public discourse had gone further.
He also criticised some of the labels being attached to the proposed constitutional amendment, questioning whether they were grounded in the Constitution or in the substance of the proposal.
The Government, he said, would continue to approach the reforms on the basis of the broader policy principles behind restructuring and strengthening the justice system.
