News
Certain provisions in 20A inimical to rule of law, separation of powers and sovereignty of people – BASL
A special committee, appointed by the Bar Association of Sri Lanka to study the proposed 20th Amendment to the Constitution and submit a report, is of the view some of the provisions therein are inimical to the rule of law, the administration of justice and the sovereignty of people.
The committee appointed on Sept 14, consisted of LMK Arulanandan PC (chairman), MM Zuhair PC, Prasantha Lal De Alwis PC, Nihal Jayawardene PC, Nalin Ladduwahetty PC, Maithri Wickremesinghe PC, Uditha Egalahewa PC, Mohan Weerakoon PC, ST Jayatunga PC, Priyal Wijeweera PC, Maurapada Gunawansha PC, Jagath Wickramanayaka PC and Shantha Jayawardana (Convenor).
The committee has observed, in its report, that the President being the repository of substantial powers under the Constitution should be held accountable for the exercise of those powers in accordance with the Constitution.
Referring to the Clause 5 of the Bill about the imunity of the President, the BASL committee says no person is above the law and granting absolute immunity from suit contrary to all known principles of the rule of law.
The committee has said it is inimical to the rule of law that the President should have control over the appointment of members of the Financial Commission and the Auditor General.The BASL committee says the appointment of the Attorney General should be made by the President subject to the approval of Parliamentary Council to ensure that the legislature and the executive provide necessary checks and balances relating to the appointment concerned.
About the proposed Parliamentary Council, which is to replace the existing Constitutionl Council, the BALSL committe has said: “The BASL of the view that the composition of the Parliamentary Council proposed by Clause 6 of the Bill is more conducive to the rule of law than the composition of the Constitutional Council contained in Article 41A of the Constitution. The inclusion in the Constitutional Council of persons who are not elected by the people is contrary to the sovereignty of the people and not conducive to the rule of law. The committee noted that non-elected members of the present Constitutional Council are not answerable to an organ of the State.”
The committee opines that it is imperative that the Executive should not have control of the appointment of judges or the members to the Judicial Service Commission. “Indeed, if there is one arm of government that should have control it is Parliament and not the president.”
The BASL is of the view that the President should not have absolute control over the judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. It says these appointments should be made by the President subject to the approval of the Parliamentary Committee.
The BASL says the President as the repository of the executive, power should be able to exercise executive power as a minister of the cabinet.
The BASL says the act of vesting in the President unfettered power to dissolve Parliament is contrary to rule of law, the separation of powers and the sovereignty of people. “The legislative power of the people is exercised by Parliament. The Parliament is elected for a period of five years by the people. The legislature, the executive and the judiciary are co-equal organs of Government. The President as the head of the executive being granted the unfettered power to dissolve parliament at his whim albeit after one year but before the term of office of parliament has expired is contrary to the rule of law and the separation of powers. It is contrary to the sovereignty of the people.”
Latest News
70,297 persons still in safety centers
The Situation Report issued by the Disaster Management Center at 06:00AM on 16th December 2025 shows that 70,297 persons belonging to 22,338 house holds are still being housed at 731 safety centers established by the government.
The number of deaths due to the recent disastrous weather stands at 643 while 183 persons are missing.

News
MEPA to crack down on marine polluters
… Warns would-be polluters of criminal prosecution, hefty fines and even blacklisting
The Marine Environment Protection Authority (MEPA) has warned that ship owners, operators and local entities responsible for marine pollution will face criminal prosecution, heavy financial penalties and possible blacklisting, MEPA Chairman Samantha Gunasekera said yesterday.
Gunasekera told The Island that Sri Lanka would no longer tolerate negligence and regulatory breaches that threaten the country’s marine ecosystems, coastal livelihoods and national economy.
“Any party that pollutes our seas—whether foreign vessels or local operators—should be prepared to face the full force of the law,” Gunasekera said. “There will be no room for excuses, delays or backdoor negotiations when marine pollution is involved.”
He said MEPA has intensified surveillance of major shipping routes, ports and environmentally sensitive zones amid rising maritime traffic through Sri Lankan waters, which remain among the busiest in the Indian Ocean.
by Ifham Nizam
News
SC delegation, headed by CJ Surasena, observes Indian Supreme Court in action
A 10-member delegation from Sri Lanka’s Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice P. Padman Surasena, departed to New Delhi on the 11th of December, 2025, for an official visit to the Supreme Court of India as part of the ongoing official visit by the delegation to India.
The group was accorded a ceremonial welcome in the Court’s main hall, led by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant. CJI Kant told the assembled Judges that “the Indian judiciary was honoured to host” their Sri Lankan counterparts, expressing hope that the visit would be “meaningful and very constructive” and underscoring the “close emotional bonds” between the two countries.
The focal point of the programme was a special sitting of the Supreme Court. Chief Justice Surasena joined CJI Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi on the bench, presiding over the Court as a guest Justice. He was accompanied by nine other Supreme Court justices from Sri Lanka, who took seats in the well of CJI Kant’s courtroom to observe the day’s proceedings.
Supreme Court Bar Association President Vikas Singh formally greeted the delegation and praised Justice Surasena’s reformist efforts. Singh recalled the Sri Lankan Chief Justice’s own maxim, “If you want something you have never had, then you have got to do something you have never done”, highlighting the bold changes Surasena had introduced to modernise Sri Lanka’s Court system. Singh noted that these initiatives, particularly court digitization, were aimed at eradicating “the persisting problems of law delays” and streamlining case backlogs.
The Sri Lankan Judges spent the morning observing live Supreme Court proceedings in CJI Kant’s courtroom. This first-hand exposure to Indian court operations formed a key part of the programme’s judicial engagement. During the hour-long session, the visiting justices witnessed a range of cases on the Supreme Court’s roster, with Justice Surasena and the delegation following arguments from the front. The experience was designed to be immersive and following the hearing the Sri Lankan Judges were briefed on India’s own initiatives towards a digitalised court system, e-filing and case management systems.
The official programme then shifted to capacity-building and information exchange. In the early afternoon, Indian Supreme Court officials gave the Sri Lankan delegation detailed briefings on India’s technological initiatives. Court registrars demonstrated the e-filing system and other e-initiatives implemented by the Supreme Court of India. Additional presentations outlined the Court’s new case management systems and administrative reforms. These sessions highlighted how digital tools and better case-listing procedures have been used in India to increase efficiency. The Sri Lankan judges asked questions about India’s experience with electronic court records and the integration of technology in daily judicial work, reflecting their own interest in similar reforms back home.
The visit underscored the growing collaboration between the Indian and Sri Lankan judiciaries. Throughout the proceedings, both sides emphasised their shared legal traditions and mutual respect. As Chief Justice Surasena noted during the sitting, India is Sri Lanka’s “closest neighbour,” and historic links, even dating back to ancient epics, form the backdrop for today’s judicial dialogue. CJI Kant remarked that having the chief justices of two vibrant democracies together on the bench was a “significant moment” for the rule of law.
The Sri Lankan delegation continued its programme in Delhi on 12 December with a visit to the Delhi High Court and its International Arbitration and Mediation Centres. The exchange visit is expected to deepen judicial cooperation and provide practical insights for both courts. Officials on both sides say the engagement aimed at sharing best practices in court administration, reinforce legal ties and support ongoing reforms aimed at reducing case backlogs and delays.
-
Features7 days agoFinally, Mahinda Yapa sets the record straight
-
Features7 days agoHandunnetti and Colonial Shackles of English in Sri Lanka
-
Business6 days agoCabinet approves establishment of two 50 MW wind power stations in Mullikulum, Mannar region
-
News6 days agoGota ordered to give court evidence of life threats
-
Features6 days agoCliff and Hank recreate golden era of ‘The Young Ones’
-
Opinion7 days agoA national post-cyclone reflection period?
-
Features6 days agoSri Lanka and Global Climate Emergency: Lessons of Cyclone Ditwah
-
Latest News7 days agoSri Lanka squad named for ACC Men’s U19 Asia Cup
