By Murali Vallipuranathan –

As Parliament moves to table the 22nd Constitutional Amendment and Judicature (Amendment) Bills to extend the retirement age of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges by two years, the public debate has devolved into familiar partisan theater. As a medical demographer, I view this proposed reform not through a narrow political lens, but as a vital demographic, economic, and institutional necessity. Extending retirement ages should not stop at the judiciary; it must urgently encompass medical specialists, university academics, and other specialized professionals whose expertise Sri Lanka cannot afford to discard prematurely.

The Global Standard: Sri Lanka Is the Outlier

Across comparable Commonwealth and international jurisdictions, mandatory retirement ages recognize both modern human longevity and the irreplaceable value of accumulated jurisprudential wisdom:

United Kingdom: Mandatory retirement age for judges was restored to 70 (and up to 75 for select judicial roles).

Australia and New Zealand: Superior court judges serve until age 70.

Canada: Superior court judges retire at 75.

United States: Federal judges hold lifetime tenure during good behavior.

India: Supreme Court judges retire at 65, with sustained high-level policy advocacy to raise the threshold to 67 or 70.

Sri Lanka’s practice of forcing top appellate judges into retirement at 63 and 65 cuts short careers at the very pinnacle of judicial maturity, creating avoidable institutional instability.

1.13 Million Reasons for Reform: The Backlog Crisis

The judicial system groans under a staggering burden. Over 1.13 million cases remain pending across the island’s court hierarchy, including more than 5,700 cases before the Supreme Court and nearly 4,600 before the Court of Appeal.

In a country where “justice delayed is justice denied” is an everyday reality, shedding seasoned judges every few months exacerbates delays and stalls court benches. Retaining senior judicial talent guarantees procedural continuity and directly addresses the systemic logjam denying citizens timely justice.

Demographic Realities and Economic Dependency

Sri Lanka possesses one of the fastest-aging demographic profiles in South Asia. Collapsing fertility rates paired with expanded life expectancies mean our old-age economic dependency ratio is climbing rapidly.

From an epidemiological and demographic standpoint, retiring specialized minds in their early 60s is economically irrational. It drains public sector pension schemes while stripping the state of productive human capital. Aligning retirement ages with demographic realities across the judiciary, public health, and academia is essential to sustain national productivity.

The Flawed Logic of the Opposition

The resistance manufactured by the opposition relies on political anxiety rather than policy merit:

Fear of Accountability: The panic among political factions suggests a deeper apprehension: a strengthened, efficient judiciary with unbroken continuity will expedite high-profile corruption, financial crime, and criminal trials, ensuring wrongdoers and their collaborators face swift legal accountability.

Shielding Behind Religious Authority: Opponents expose a striking poverty of ideas by dragging the venerable Mahanayakas into administrative and constitutional policy. Sacralizing secular state reforms without advancing a single empirical argument is a disservice to both governance and religious institutions.

The Disappointing Posture of the Bar: The opposition mounted by segments of the legal fraternity highlights narrow sectional interests over public welfare. Were the retirement ages of medical consultants or senior university professors extended, their respective professional bodies would welcome the retention of scarce national expertise. The legal profession should be championing swift justice for litigants, not protecting case delays.

Sri Lanka cannot allow partisan obstruction to derail vital institutional modernization. Passing the judicial service extension bill is an urgent, rational first step—and it should pave the way for a comprehensive overhaul of retirement policies across all vital professional sectors.

*Dr. Murali Vallipuranathan is a Consultant Community Physician and a medical demographer with a postgraduate qualification in demography. He is also a visiting lecturer at the Universities of Jaffna, Peradeniya, and Colombo, a Senior Specialist attached to the Ministry of Health, and a Council Member of the Sri Lanka Medical Association. The views expressed in this article are offered in a spirit of professional and social responsibility and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of any affiliated institution.