Supreme Court Justice Yasantha Kodagoda says completing a single cycle of a criminal case in Sri Lanka takes an average of 10 years and 2 months, underscoring the severe delays plaguing the justice system.

Speaking at an event, Justice Kodagoda highlighted that there are currently 1.1 million cases pending across the country’s courts. 

These are handled by just 333 courts, including 80 magistrate courts, two child magistrate courts, 64 district courts, 94 combined district magistrate courts, 53 High Courts, five commercial courts, 23 civil appellate High Courts, seven judges at the Court of Appeal, and five divisions of the Supreme Court.

He noted that if cases were evenly distributed, each court would be burdened with more than 3,300 cases. The limited capacity of judges, legal officers, and support staff directly impacts the pace of justice.

Explaining the process, Justice Kodagoda said once a crime is reported, police investigate, the case is heard before a magistrate, charges are filed by the Attorney General at the High Court, and then the trial proceeds to conclusion. 

He pointed out that a 2013 survey revealed that this cycle takes over a decade to complete.

“As an example, if a burglary is reported today, the first phase of the case would only conclude in August 2036,” he said, stressing the urgent need for reforms to address systemic delays. (Newswire)

The post Criminal cases take average 10 years to conclude, SC judge says appeared first on Newswire.

The High Court and Magistrate’s Court, currently operating inside the UNESCO‑declared Galle Fort, are to be vacated and relocated to the newly built court complex in Beligaha, Galle. 

The move comes under the “Galle Revival Project,” an integrated development initiative designed to preserve the Fort’s archaeological value while promoting tourism.

The Cabinet has approved the proposal submitted by the Minister of Urban Development, which will allow the vacated historic buildings to be repurposed for tourism promotion projects through a public‑private partnership model.

According to the government, the decision is part of the Greater Galle Development Plan (2021–2030), which designates the Fort as a World Heritage Tourism Zone. 

The project aims to ease traffic congestion, reduce administrative use of heritage buildings, and enhance the visitor experience for the more than 300,000 local and foreign tourists who visit the site annually. (Newswire)

The post Cabinet approves relocation of Galle Courts under revival project appeared first on Newswire.

The Ministry of Justice has announced that the initiative aimed at the speedy disposal of productions stored in court premises has yielded significant results, generating Rs. 952,896,911.74 in 2025 alone. 

According to the ministry, when combined with other judicial revenue sources, including copying fees, notary fees, fines, stamp duties, and bail bond confiscations, the total income generated through the courts amounted to Rs. 6,574,829,926.91.

For decades, Magistrates’ Courts and High Courts across Sri Lanka were burdened with vast quantities of seized items handed over by police and government authorities. 

These ranged from vehicles, timber, sand, and agricultural tools to firearms, explosives, and narcotics. Their accumulation consumed valuable space, created logistical and security challenges, and led to economic losses as imported vehicles deteriorated unused within the court premises.

The Justice Ministry stated that a turning point came with the appointment of Justice P. Padman Surasena as Chief Justice, under whose leadership the Judicial Service Commission launched this unprecedented disposal programme. 

The project was carried out in close collaboration with the “Clean Sri Lanka” initiative introduced by the President, and was supported by judges, judicial officers, ministry officials, police, the tri-forces, and other stakeholders.

Stating that the results have been transformative, the Justice Ministry said court premises once cluttered with abandoned vehicles, timber logs, and sand piles have been cleared and revitalized, with many sites now featuring landscaped gardens and flowerbeds.

Beyond aesthetics, the initiative has reinforced public confidence in the justice system, improved efficiency, and demonstrated environmental stewardship, it added. 

The following is the revenue yielded through the initiative:

The post Justice Ministry: Court disposal initiative generates Rs. 953 Mn in 2025 appeared first on Newswire.

Minister of Justice Harshana Nanayakkara has instructed relevant officials to provide the necessary infrastructure quickly to establish courts in official residences previously used by former ministers.

Minister Nanayakkara gave these instructions during an inspection visit on Thursday (12 Feb) to official residences handed over by the Ministry of Public Administration to the Ministry of Justice for the establishment of special High Courts.

As part of the Anti‑Corruption Action Plan (2025–2029), four official residences previously used by former ministers have been temporarily allocated to the Ministry of Justice to expedite court proceedings.

Accordingly, the official residences located at No. B/88 Gregory Road, Colombo 07; No. C/76 Bauddhaloka Mawatha, Colombo 07; No. B/108 Wijerama Road, Colombo 07; and No. B/12 Stanmore Crescent, Colombo 07, were inspected by the Minister.

At the residence at No. C/76 Bauddhaloka Mawatha, Colombo 07, a special High Court has already been established to hear cases related to the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks. The Minister instructed officials to expedite the provision of further necessary facilities at this location.

The residences at No. B/88 Gregory Road, Colombo 07; No. B/108 Wijerama Road, Colombo 07; and No. B/12 Stanmore Crescent, Colombo 07, were also inspected, with discussions held on providing the required facilities to establish courts there.

Meanwhile, the Justice Minister, together with ministry officials, also participated in a special inspection tour of the completed Magistrates’ Court building complex under the Hulftsdorp Court Complex project.

Due to renovation work at the Supreme Court complex, Supreme Court proceedings had been temporarily conducted at the completed Magistrates’ Court building complex.

Since renovations at the Supreme Court complex have now been completed and proceedings have returned there, discussions were held on the possibility of establishing five new High Courts within the Magistrates’ Court building complex to expedite judicial proceedings.

Senior officials of the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Public Administration, and the Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau participated in the inspection tour. (Newswire)

The post Four former ministerial residences to be converted into courts appeared first on Newswire.

A woman has lodged a legal case alleging that Sri Lankan cricketer Chamika Karunaratne is the father of her child and has refused to accept responsibility.

Speaking to the media after attending today’s court case, she said Karunaratne had failed to appear in court, citing illness.

“Chamika Karunaratne is this child’s father. As he has refused to accept responsibility, I have been forced to come to court seeking a paternity test. I am not sure if he will even appear at future court hearings. He wasted my time at the Women and Children Bureau while I was pregnant, and now the child is two months old. This child needs to live in Sri Lanka. I know he is the father. All I want is for him to fulfil his duties,” the woman said. (Newswire)

The post Woman seeks court-ordered Paternity Test against Sri Lankan Cricketer appeared first on Newswire.

On February 1, Pakistan’s President Asif Zardari made a controversial move by sanctioning the relocation of judges from other courts to the Islamabad High Court (IHC), despite strong reservations expressed by five judges of the IHC.

This decision has raised significant concerns about the independence of the judiciary and the possibility of political interference in one of Pakistan’s most influential courts. The IHC has a history of being at the centre of judicial independence debates, particularly following complaints lodged by its judges to the former Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) about the establishment’s influence in judicial matters.

The government’s actions in this context appear to be part of a broader strategy to manage judicial outcomes, with speculation mounting over whether one of the relocated judges will be appointed as the new chief justice of the IHC.

The Islamabad High Court, established in 2010, plays a crucial role in Pakistan’s judicial system. The court handles high-profile cases involving government officials, politicians, and institutions. Its decisions often have significant political and social consequences. Because of its unique position, the IHC has historically been a focal point for discussions about judicial independence and the balance of power between the executive and the judiciary.

Over the years, there have been frequent concerns about political interference in the judiciary, particularly with the growing influence of the military establishment in Pakistan’s political landscape. The IHC, in many ways, has found itself caught between these forces, striving to maintain its independence while delivering justice in some of the most politically sensitive cases.

Is the relocation plan a political move?

On February 1, President Zardari, in his official capacity, approved a plan to relocate judges from other courts to the IHC. While such moves are not entirely unusual in Pakistan’s judicial system, the timing and context of this relocation plan have raised eyebrows.

The five judges of the IHC, in a rare collective expression of concern, publicly voiced their strong objections to the plan. They feared that the relocation of judges from other courts, particularly those with ties to the political establishment, could undermine the IHC’s independence. The judges’ reservations stem from a variety of reasons. One key concern is that the relocation could be politically motivated, with the government seeking to install judges who may be more amenable to political influence.

This fear is exacerbated by the possibility that one of the relocated judges could end up being appointed as the chief justice of the IHC, a position of immense influence in shaping the court’s future decisions. Historically, the IHC has been a site of tension between the judiciary and the executive. In recent years, the IHC judges have openly criticized what they see as the growing interference of the establishment in court affairs.

These concerns were made more apparent when judges from the IHC lodged complaints with the former CJP about the increasing pressure from the government and military institutions in judicial matters. Such complaints are not without precedent, as various judicial officers have faced pressure to align their decisions with the political interests of the day.

The relocation plan, coming at a time when the judiciary has been increasingly vocal about its autonomy, is seen by many as a direct response to these tensions. By transferring judges with potentially closer ties to the political establishment, the government could be attempting to alter the dynamic of the IHC and weaken its resistance to external influences.

This move raises questions about whether the relocation is an attempt to tame a court that has occasionally stepped out of line with the executive and military establishment.

Fear of political manipulation

A major point of concern for the judges of the IHC is the possibility that one of the relocated judges could be appointed as the new chief justice of the IHC. Given the contentious history of the court’s relationship with the government, this fear is not unfounded.

The chief justice of the IHC holds a pivotal role in shaping the court’s decisions and influencing the overall direction of judicial proceedings. If a politically aligned judge were to assume this role, it could significantly compromise the IHC’s independence and its ability to act as an impartial body.

The speculation surrounding the potential appointment of a new chief justice is a particularly sensitive issue, given that the IHC judges have been outspoken in their criticism of political interference. It remains to be seen whether the relocation of judges will result in the appointment of someone who is viewed as politically aligned or neutral.

However, considering the government’s track record of influencing judicial appointments, many believe that such an outcome is not only possible but likely. The fear that the IHC will be penalised for its past complaints against the establishment adds another layer of complexity to the situation.

The judges’ outspoken stance against political meddling may have made them targets for retribution. The relocation plan could, therefore, be seen as part of a broader strategy to bring the court under tighter control, particularly in terms of its leadership.

Implications for judicial independence

The relocation of judges to the IHC is more than just a procedural matter; it is a significant development with the potential to reshape the court’s future. If the government succeeds in installing judges who are perceived to be loyal to political interests, it could set a dangerous precedent for judicial independence in Pakistan.

This move could embolden other branches of the government and the military to exert further control over the judiciary, undermining its ability to function as an impartial arbiter of the law. In a broader context, the issue of judicial independence has been a long-standing concern in Pakistan.

Over the years, the judiciary has faced increasing pressure from political forces, including the executive and military. The IHC, as one of the most prominent courts in the country, has been at the centre of these struggles. While the judiciary has made strides in asserting its independence, moves like the relocation of judges threaten to reverse these gains and place the court back under the influence of political power.

The government’s actions also raise questions about the broader state of democracy and the rule of law in Pakistan. If the judiciary is perceived to be under the control of political forces, it could lead to a crisis of confidence in the legal system. This could have far-reaching consequences, both domestically and internationally, as foreign investors, diplomats, and human rights organisations closely monitor the independence of Pakistan’s courts.

The decision to relocate judges to the IHC has set the stage for a crucial test of judicial integrity in Pakistan. While the relocation may appear as a routine administrative decision, its implications are far-reaching and potentially destabilising for the independence of the judiciary. 

As the situation unfolds, the actions of the IHC’s judges, the new appointments, and the eventual appointment of a chief justice will all play a critical role in determining the future of judicial independence in Pakistan. (Asian Age)

The post Pakistan judges’ concerns over relocation plan: Judicial autonomy at risk? appeared first on Newswire.