Sri Lanka’s effort to retain preferential trade access to the European Union has run into a new complication, as a proposed constitutional amendment affecting the judiciary draws scrutiny from legal bodies and international observers ahead of critical GSP+ negotiations.
The disputed measure, the proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, would alter the retirement ages of judges serving on the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, and has become entangled with Colombo’s efforts to demonstrate compliance with the human rights and governance standards that underpin its trade privileges with Brussels.
What the amendment proposes
The 22nd Amendment would change how long serving judges of the country’s two highest courts remain in office.
Officials have defended the move as necessary to address a substantial backlog of cases and to ease pressure on an overstretched judicial system, arguing that retaining experienced judges for longer would strengthen the administration of justice rather than weaken it.
Legal bodies hit back
Opposition to the proposal has focused not on the length of judicial terms itself but on the principle at stake.
Legal experts and rights advocates contend that altering the retirement terms of judges already sitting on the bench threatens the security of tenure that underpins judicial independence, a safeguard widely regarded as essential to the separation of powers.
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has formally objected to the plan on these grounds, while the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers has written to the government requesting clarification on the amendment and its likely consequences for judicial autonomy.
Why Brussels is watching closely
What began as a domestic political rift now carries major geopolitical and economic stakes, placing Sri Lanka’s vital GSP+ trade concessions directly on the line. To qualify for the scheme, beneficiary countries must ratify and effectively enforce a wide range of international conventions spanning human rights, labour standards, environmental protection and governance.
The European Commission’s newer GSP framework places special emphasis on this second requirement, so Sri Lanka must prove not merely that it has signed up to these obligations, but that they are being upheld in practice through its laws, institutions and administrative conduct.
Sri Lanka enters the process already under EU scrutiny on several fronts.
Brussels has previously raised serious concerns over the application of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), pressed for further human rights reforms, raised questions over the Online Safety Act, and noted delays in the country’s reporting against its international human rights commitments.
Any perception that the judiciary’s independence is being eroded would add to this list rather than exist in isolation.
Officials in Brussels have not signalled that the 22nd Amendment alone would jeopardise Sri Lanka’s GSP+ renewal, and drawing that conclusion at this stage would outpace the available evidence.
The more realistic threat lies in accumulation. Should concerns over the judiciary combine with existing unease about counter-terrorism legislation, online regulation and reporting gaps, the cumulative picture could shape the EU’s overall judgement on whether Sri Lanka continues to meet the threshold required of GSP+ beneficiaries.
Government response
Recognising the stakes, the government has set up a Cabinet subcommittee drawing on several ministries to coordinate the country’s preparations for the forthcoming GSP+ review.
Its remit includes identifying where Sri Lanka’s implementation of international commitments falls short and readying the country to meet the scheme’s updated requirements.
Economic stakes
Access to European markets carries substantial weight for Sri Lanka’s export-driven industries, with apparel manufacturing among the sectors most exposed to any disruption.
The government now faces a dual challenge, needing to protect the independence and standing of domestic institutions while simultaneously convincing Brussels that its international commitments are being honoured in substance rather than on paper.
How the row over judicial retirement terms is ultimately resolved may prove a decisive indicator of whether Colombo can manage both demands at once, with the outcome likely to shape the terms of engagement as formal GSP+ discussions with the EU move ahead.