⚖️ Sri Lanka Judiciary: Calls for Reform & Transparency

A public debate has emerged over proposals to extend the tenure of the Chief Justice and Supreme Court Judges, alongside delays by the President in filling eight judicial vacancies. Concurrently, Parliament recently rejected a motion to examine the Judicial Service Commission's (JSC) power over the disciplinary control and termination of judicial officers. • Key Issues & Allegations: The JSC is facing allegations in Parliament of acting arbitrarily in terminating several judicial officers. While the Speaker rejected a parliamentary oversight motion on the grounds that the JSC exercises judicial power, historical precedent (_The Queen v. Liyanage, 1962_) dictates that the JSC performs executive functions, not judicial power. • Global Standards Gaps: Experts note that the Sri Lankan Judiciary has failed to adopt two critical 21st-century UN-sponsored global instruments designed to guide the professional, ethical, and disciplinary frameworks of judges: The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2006): Outlines that disciplinary actions must be defined by law, limited to serious misconduct, handled by an independent tribunal with full rights of defense, and allow for appeals. The Istanbul Declaration on Transparency (2019): Requires the promulgation of ethical standards, mandatory judicial ethics training, and mechanisms for judges to seek guidance on conduct. • Systemic Context: The JSC, originally formed in 1946 and restored under the 1978 Constitution, is facing criticism for failing to align with modern international frameworks. Adopting these global standards is highlighted as essential for safeguarding the independence, impartiality, and integrity of Sri Lanka's judicial administration.