BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya: Defending Judicial Independence or Eyeing a Political Career?
The controversy surrounding the proposed constitutional amendment to extend the retirement age of Sri Lanka's superior court judges has taken a dramatic political turn . At the centre of the storm is Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) President Rajeev Amarasuriya, who has been accused by a government MP of striking a political deal with Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa to oppose the government's proposal in exchange for a Western Province Chief Ministerial candidacy . While Amarasuriya and the BASL have vehemently denied these allegations, the episode raises uncomfortable questions about the intersection of professional leadership and political ambition in Sri Lanka.
The Allegations: A Deal for the Chief Minister's Post?
On July 24, 2026, National People's Power (NPP) MP Asitha Niroshana Egoda Withanage stood in Parliament and made a dramatic claim: that BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya had held discussions with Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa, who had allegedly promised him the Western Province Chief Ministerial candidacy at the upcoming Provincial Council election in exchange for BASL's opposition to the government's proposal . The MP further alleged that Amarasuriya had been offered the position of Chief Minister in return for campaigning against the government's move .
The allegations were made under parliamentary privilege, providing the MP with protection from defamation claims .
The Denials: "Utterly False, Baseless, and Made with Malicious Intent"
The response from the BASL was swift and unequivocal. In a strongly worded statement signed by Deputy President Rienzie Arsecularatne and Secretary Nalin De Silva, the Association categorically rejected the allegations, describing them as "utterly false, baseless, and made with malicious intent" .
The BASL challenged MP Egoda Withanage to repeat the allegations outside Parliament without the protection of parliamentary privilege, stating that doing so would enable "appropriate legal consequences to follow" . The Association expressed "deep dismay" over what it termed false utterances made under parliamentary privilege and accused the MP of attempting to mislead the public through unfounded and defamatory allegations .
Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa also denied the allegations, describing them as "the latest lie of the NPP" and asserting that the SJB had "never given political bribes to anyone" . In a social media post, Premadasa challenged the MP: "I challenge MP Asitha Niroshana to come outside Parliament and repeat this" .
Free Lawyers Association Convenor Maithri Gunaratne also came to Amarasuriya's defence, challenging NPP members to repeat the allegation outside Parliament, warning that "millions can be claimed as damages" .
The Broader Context: BASL's Principled Opposition
The BASL's opposition to the judicial retirement age extension is not a recent development. The Association has consistently maintained that the retirement ages of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges, unchanged since the 1978 Constitution, should not be altered arbitrarily . BASL President Amarasuriya had previously conveyed these concerns to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake in a letter dated May 25, 2026 .
In a public forum on July 4, 2026, Amarasuriya explicitly stated: "The Bar Association's position on this issue is one of constitutional principle. It is not directed against any political party or government, nor is it based on who presently occupies judicial office" . The BASL has called for a referendum if the government proceeds with the constitutional amendment and has urged the President to fill the eight existing vacancies in the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal .
The Commonwealth Lawyers Association has also endorsed the BASL's position, with President Steven Thiru commending the BASL for its "courageous and principled defence of the independence of the judiciary" .
The Problem of Perception: When Professional Leadership Meets Political Ambition
The allegations against Amarasuriya, even if unsubstantiated, highlight a fundamental problem in Sri Lanka's legal and political landscape: the blurred lines between professional leadership and political aspiration. The BASL President is a figure of significant influence, tasked with defending judicial independence and the rule of law. When allegations of political deal-making emerge, they inevitably raise questions about the motives behind professional positions.
The government has been quick to weaponise these allegations, using them to undermine the credibility of the BASL's opposition to the judicial retirement age extension . Whether or not the allegations are true, the mere existence of such claims damages public confidence in the legal profession and its leadership.
A History of Politicisation
The politicisation of the BASL is not a new phenomenon. As early as 2017, battle lines were drawn at BASL elections according to political preferences . Lawyers supporting different political factions have historically contested BASL leadership positions, raising concerns about the organisation's independence .
Amarasuriya himself has held multiple prominent positions across State and private sector institutions, including serving on the Governing Board of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka . He is also a Council Member of the University of Colombo and represents Sri Lanka in the Commonwealth Legal Education Association . His extensive professional network inevitably exposes him to the charge of political ambition, whether justified or not.
Restoring Public Trust
The allegations against BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya, whether true or false, have already inflicted damage on the legal profession's reputation. The BASL's principled opposition to the judicial retirement age extension, which is consistent with international legal standards and constitutional principles , has been tainted by accusations of political deal-making .
To restore public trust, the BASL must demonstrate that its positions are driven solely by constitutional principle, not political ambition. Amarasuriya and his colleagues have forcefully denied the allegations and challenged their accusers to repeat them outside the protection of parliamentary privilege . It is now incumbent upon the accusers to either substantiate their claims with evidence or withdraw them.
The broader lesson is clear: Sri Lanka's legal profession must guard against the perception of politicisation. As the Commonwealth Lawyers Association has observed, "the judiciary must not only remain independent in fact, but must also manifestly be seen to be independent" . The same principle applies to the legal profession and its leadership. The BASL's credibility—and its ability to defend judicial independence—depends on maintaining public confidence in its integrity. Any perception of political ambition risks undermining that confidence and the profession's ability to fulfil its constitutional role.