By: Ovindi Vishmika
August 21, Colombo (LNW): The independence of the judiciary has long been considered the cornerstone of democracy. In Sri Lanka, however, this vital pillar appears increasingly fragile, as recent judicial transfers and appointments by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) have triggered fresh concerns about political interference in the courts. The turmoil has revived longstanding questions: Can Sri Lanka’s judiciary remain impartial in the face of political pressure, or is it becoming another extension of partisan power?
A Wave of Controversial Transfers
On August 25, 2025, the JSC reassigned several key judges in a move that has shaken the judicial establishment. Colombo Chief Magistrate B.J.T.L. Jayasinghe—ranked 17th in seniority—was transferred as Mahara District Judge. Kesbewa District Judge Y.R.B. Nelumdeniya, ranked 26th, was moved to Hambantota. At the same time, less senior judges, some ranked as low as 65th, were elevated to powerful posts.
The most controversial appointment was that of Judge Asanka Bodaragama, ranked only 58th in seniority, as the new Colombo Chief Magistrate. His past as a junior lawyer under Justice Minister Harsha Nanayakkara has raised serious doubts about whether his promotion was merit-based—or politically motivated. The Colombo Chief Magistrate’s Court is no ordinary bench; it is a central hub for high-profile cases involving politicians, officials, and powerful business interests.
Legal circles fear that these transfers are not about efficiency or experience but about influence. Cases against Cabinet Minister Wasantha Samarasinghe, Deputy Minister Mahinda Jayasinghe, and other politically exposed figures may now be affected, undermining public trust in the fairness of
proceedings.
Politics in the Courtroom
While senior government officials have denied involvement—claiming even President Anura Kumara Dissanayake was unaware of the decisions—opposition voices are unconvinced. SLPP MP Namal Rajapaksa, addressing Parliament, accused the government of “politicizing the judiciary,” warning that judges presiding over cases linked to top government MPs had been transferred. His words echoed a wider sentiment: the judiciary, once viewed as the ultimate check on executive excess, is fast losing credibility.
This erosion of judicial independence is not new. At independence in 1948, Sri Lanka’s judiciary enjoyed relative autonomy, with traditions of professionalism and integrity. But constitutional changes in 1972 and 1978 cut back on protections, concentrating judicial appointments in the presidency’s hands. The absence of transparent promotion rules or reliable oversight mechanisms left space for manipulation.
The impeachment of Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake in 2013 remains the starkest example of political overreach. Widely condemned as illegal and politically motivated, her removal demonstrated how far the executive and legislature were willing to go to bend the judiciary to their will.That episode created a “chilling effect” on judges, making them reluctant to challenge government abuses.
Consequences for Democracy
The politicization of the judiciary has profound implications for democracy. First, it undermines the doctrine of separation of powers. When judges feel pressured to rule in line with political interests, they cease to act as a check on executive or legislative excesses. This imbalance corrodes governance, allowing corruption, abuse of power, and human rights violations to go unpunished.
Second, it erodes public trust. For ordinary citizens, the courts are the final recourse against injustice. If appointments and transfers are seen as politically engineered, people lose faith in the legal system’s impartiality. In a country scarred by decades of ethnic conflict, such mistrust exacerbates divisions rather than fostering reconciliation.
Third, it weakens protections for minorities and vulnerable groups. Emergency laws such as the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) have long given security forces wide powers, often used disproportionately against Tamils. In such cases, only an independent judiciary can offer relief. Yet repeated failures of magistrate courts and high courts to provide remedies against arbitrary detention and torture demonstrate the dangers of a bench compromised by politics.
The Bigger Picture: A Legacy of Interference
International reports highlight how Sri Lanka’s judiciary has been systematically undermined. The International Bar Association and International Commission of Jurists (IBA/ICJ) noted that judicial appointments and removals have become politicized, while intimidation and attacks against lawyers further erode accountability.Transparency International Sri Lanka warned that the impeachment of Chief Justice Bandaranayake disrupted the constitutional balance of power, violating both domestic and international legal norms.
These practices entrench impunity. From the killings of journalists and aid workers to allegations of war crimes, politically influenced courts have failed to hold perpetrators accountable. As a result, victims remain without justice, while political elites remain untouchable.
The Way Forward
Despite this grim picture, Sri Lanka is not without options. A path to reform exists, but it requires both political will and judicial courage:
• Reconstitute the Constitutional Council: To depoliticize judicial appointments and limit executive overreach.
• Reform Emergency Laws: The repeal or radical revision of the PTA and Public Security Ordinance is vital to restore judicial authority.
• Strengthen the JSC: Clear rules must govern transfers and promotions to protect judges from arbitrary punishment or reward.
• Ensure Accountability: Attacks on judges and lawyers must be investigated and prosecuted to guarantee the safety of those who defend the rule of law.
Above all, the new leadership in the judiciary must demonstrate independence, resisting the temptation to serve political masters. As retired Justice C.V. Vigneswaran once warned, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Without checks and balances, Sri Lanka risks sliding further into a state where democracy exists in name only.
Justice at Stake
The judiciary is more than a branch of government—it is the heartbeat of democracy. When its independence is compromised, so too are the rights and freedoms of every citizen. The recent transfers by the JSC may seem administrative on the surface, but their implications run far deeper. They raise the specter of a politicized judiciary, one that fails to act as guardian of the constitution and protector of justice.
For Sri Lanka, the stakes could not be higher. Restoring faith in the judiciary is essential not only for good governance but also for reconciliation, stability, and peace. Without an independent judiciary, the promise of democracy risks becoming an illusion.
