The Supreme Court today began considering 67 petitions challenging the proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, with several procedural and substantive issues raised during the hearing.
The petitions were taken up before a five-member bench headed by Chief Justice Preethi Padman Surasena and comprising Justices Achala Wengappuli, Arjuna Obeyesekere, Sampath Abeykoon and Gihan Kulatunga.
At the outset, lawyers requested that the proceedings be moved from Courtroom 502 to the larger Courtroom 501 due to limited seating and the high level of public interest in the case. The bench allowed the request and the hearing continued in Courtroom 501.
President’s Counsel M.A. Sumanthiran, appearing for the Bar Association of Sri Lanka, then requested that the petitions be heard by a full bench of the Supreme Court, arguing that the proposed amendment directly affects the tenure of superior court judges and therefore raises a potential conflict of interest.
Several other President’s Counsel, including Saliya Pieris, Ali Sabry, Geoffrey Alagaratnam, Eraj de Silva, Srinath Perera, Anura Meddegoda and Maithri Gunaratne, also made submissions on the issue.
Solicitor General Viraj Dayaratne, appearing for the Attorney General, submitted that the discretion to constitute a Supreme Court bench rests with the Chief Justice.
After considering the submissions, the five-member bench rejected the request for a full bench and ruled that the petitions would continue to be heard by the existing panel.
Substantive arguments were then presented against the proposed amendment.
Sumanthiran argued that the amendment would affect Articles 3 and 4 of the Constitution, relating to the sovereignty of the people and the exercise of judicial power, and submitted that the proposed changes should therefore be approved at a referendum.
President’s Counsel Ali Sabry, appearing for Prof. G.L. Peiris, argued that judicial independence could be affected by altering the retirement age of judges, whether by reducing or extending it.
President’s Counsel Srinath Perera also raised concerns over judges hearing a matter that could directly affect their own tenure and argued that the issue should ultimately be determined by the people through a referendum.
A total of 67 petitions have been filed challenging the proposed 22nd Amendment, including 41 filed online.
The Supreme Court hearing is continuing. (Newswire)