Cabinet Approves Move to Raise Judges’ Retirement Age as Part of Judicial Reform Package

The Cabinet of Ministers has approved a proposal to raise the statutory retirement age of judges, as part of a broader package of draft amendments to the Constitution and the Judicature Act No. 2 of 1978. The decision was made at the Cabinet meeting held on July 27, 2026, and remains subject to final approval at the next Cabinet meeting.

The proposal, submitted by the Minister of Justice and National Integration, was made under Article 146 of the Constitution and addresses several structural issues in the judiciary.

Key points behind the decision include:

Retirement age increase: With the expansion of the court system and the planned rollout of regional courts of appeal, the government has identified a need to raise the statutory retirement age for judges, in order to retain experienced and senior judicial officers within the expanded court structure.
Court of Appeal expansion: A need has been identified to increase the number of judges required to exercise the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal at the regional level.
High Court caseload: The number of High Court judges is to be increased to address the backlog of cases before the Provincial High Courts, which hold original jurisdiction over criminal matters, and the Civil Appellate High Courts, which handle civil appeals.

What Comes Next

Following Cabinet approval, the Legal Draftsman will be tasked with preparing formal draft amendments to both the Constitution and the Judicature Act. Related reporting indicates the retirement age package includes raising the age for Supreme Court judges from 65 to 67 years, and Court of Appeal judges from 63 to 65 years, with a separate proposal expected from the Ministry of Justice to revise retirement ages for High Court and Magistrates’ Court judges, who currently retire at 61 and 60 years respectively. The draft will be referred to the Attorney General for clearance before being submitted to Parliament.

The move has already drawn attention in legal circles, with some commentators raising questions around judicial independence and constitutional implications as the proposal moves toward Parliament.