From formality to substantive justification: Evolving standards on judicial accountability and reasoned decision making in Sri Lanka

Abstract

This study focuses the significant role of judicial accountability in Sri Lanka, emphasizing that judges, as guardians of justice, must deliver decisions grounded in reason, fairness, and integrity to ensure public trust and uphold the rule of law. Disregarding these standards undermines judicial legitimacy. While Sri Lankan law does not explicitly recognize judicial accountability, it is indirectly reinforced through some statutory provisions and setting standards for judgment writing, conducts, and reviews. The Civil Procedure Code (S.186) and Criminal Procedure Code (S.283) require judges to state issues, decisions, and reasons in judgments. The Judicature Act and Evidence Ordinance also influence decision-making quality and integrity. However, Sri Lanka lacks a clear and consistent approach to reasoned decision-making as a core element of accountability. Its importance has been highlighted in recent cases such as Pathirathne v. Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena and Others (SC/FR/35/2024), Sanjeewa Fernando and Others v. Somawathie Perera (SC Appeal/1/2025), and the MV X-Press Pearl matter...