Jagath Abeynaike writes to BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya

11-Aug-2026

.

Certain Opposition MPs have used parliamentary privileges to make highly defamatory and derogatory allegations personally targeting the incumbent Chief Justice. It is a matter of concern that the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has not expressed any opposition to such allegations, despite the fact that it would have strongly condemned similar statements as a serious threat to the entire judiciary and the rule of law, BASL Executive Committee member Jagath Abeynaike has informed BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya.

In a letter addressed to the BASL President, Abeynaike stressed that it has always been the tradition of the Association to intervene appropriately and proactively in defence of judicial independence.

“Against this backdrop, you should take appropriate action against the adverse impact that recent statements could have on the incumbent Chief Justice, the office of the Chief Justice and the judiciary,” he stated.

In his letter, Jagath Abeynaike further said:

“I am writing this letter regarding the offensive statements made by certain individuals personally targeting the incumbent Chief Justice during discussions concerning the extension of the tenure of judges.

“In accordance with the Government’s policy decision to extend by two years the maximum retirement age of all judges engaged in judicial proceedings, the 22nd Amendment Bill to the Constitution and the proposed Judicial System Amendment Bill have been gazetted.

“Once these Bills are placed on the Order Paper of Parliament, any party wishing to challenge their constitutional validity will have an opportunity to file a petition before the Supreme Court within 14 days.

“Against the backdrop of proposed amendments to extend the retirement age of all judges, it has been observed in recent days that various politicians, including some members of our Association, have claimed that these amendments constitute an extension of service granted specifically to the incumbent Chief Justice. In my personal view, this is a campaign that could mislead the public as well as religious leaders, including members of the Maha Sangha.

“While various parties have expressed views in support of, opposition to, or neutrality towards the proposed amendments, the Association under your leadership has publicly announced its opposition to these amendments.

“Nevertheless, I have always believed, and continue to believe, that the Association’s opposition to the proposed amendments is based on principle and is not a personal objection to the incumbent Chief Justice.

“However, I recently observed certain Opposition MPs using parliamentary privileges to make highly derogatory and defamatory allegations personally targeting the Chief Justice.

“If a serving judge had been personally targeted with such defamatory allegations in any other circumstance, I believe the BASL would have regarded it as a serious threat to the entire judiciary and the rule of law and would have strongly condemned such statements.

“However, the failure of the BASL to express any opposition to such allegations personally targeting the incumbent Chief Justice is a situation I would not have expected during my long career as a lawyer.

“Because of this inexplicable silence on the part of the BASL, it is difficult to prevent the public from forming the impression that the Association may be endorsing such statements or silently agreeing with them.

“You are well aware that it is the tradition of our Association to provide support, protection and representation, without hesitation and impartially, to judges on the Bench whenever necessary, just as we do for our professional members.

“Protecting the independence of the judiciary is one of the fundamental and explicit objectives of our Association, and it is a tradition that we have upheld with the highest regard.

“In particular, because a judge may be unable to respond personally to the damage caused to him or her, both personally and to the functioning of the judiciary publicly, by defamatory statements, there is no doubt that it is the tradition of our Association to intervene appropriately and proactively on behalf of the judge concerned and, more broadly, in defence of judicial independence.

“Against this backdrop, I strongly expect you to take appropriate action against the impact that recent statements may have on the incumbent Chief Justice, the office he holds and the judiciary.

“In the context of the ongoing discussion on extending the retirement age of judges and the criticism expressed by the BASL in this regard, the Association must, on every occasion, preserve its professional dignity.

“Although many members of our Association, including myself, may have personal political views, allowing our personal preferences or emotions to be presented as the views of the BASL, or allowing the Association’s silence on certain matters to indirectly convey an opinion to society, would seriously damage the dignity and reputation of the Association.

“Therefore, I request that I be given an opportunity at the forthcoming Executive Committee meeting to discuss the views I have raised in my capacity as a member of the Executive Committee of the BASL.”