This week, it was reported that the Ministerial Consultative Committee on Justice, Prisons Affairs and Constitutional Reforms has not concurred with the decision taken by the Council of Legal Education to make the English language the mandatory medium of examination at the Sri Lanka Law College. As The Daily Morning reported yesterday (15), this disagreement has arisen when the said Committee met in Parliament, where the Committee members had raised the importance of allowing applicants to sit for Law College examinations in their preferred language, further noting that applicants sitting for exams in their mother tongue has never been a hindrance for excellence. As English education is lacking in most rural areas, they had argued that making examinations mandatory in the English language amounts to a violation of fundamental rights.
As the Committee members have noted, the basis of the aforesaid decision lacks a sense of not just the purpose of legal education but also the practical realities with which Sri Lanka's lawyers and the legal system operates. The provision of legal education is a matter of creating legal professionals, and steps taken to streamline legal education should therefore prioritise what supports that purpose, not a notion that providing legal education in the English language would somehow elevate the quality and status of legal education or the legal profession.
More importantly, law and policy makers need to rethink whether Sri Lanka is truly ready to make it mandatory for applicants to sit for exams in the English language. Even though the English language is rapidly gaining popularity among the public, the majority of the students studying in the primary and secondary education levels still study in either the Sinhala or Tamil languages, and therefore, requiring applicants to sit for exams in the English language is a decision that will have a direct and significantly adverse impact on certain applicants. The applicants’ right to obtain education in a language of their choice should be respected, which will be in line with the citizens’ right to education without any discrimination which has been recognised by the Supreme Court.
At the same time, in a context where certain applicants sitting for Law College exams in Sinhala or Tamil languages has not created a lack of lawyers who are proficient in the English language and has not obstructed the country’s legal education in any manner, continuing to support that freedom is the way forward. It should be reiterated that in Sri Lanka, the Sinhala and Tamil languages are the main two languages and that English is the link language.
Concerning the practical realities with which Sri Lanka’s legal profession and the Judiciary operate, the role and duty of lawyers are also matters that require attention. The majority of the public converses in either Sinhala or Tamil, and when they seek the Judiciary's services, lawyers, as ordinary citizens' legal representatives, being able to link the public to the Judiciary in a language both the lawyers and the public find comfortable is of great importance. The Judiciary being the provider of an important service, the public's interests and convenience when providing that service cannot be underestimated.
It goes without a saying that as all elements of the education and higher education sectors evolve, legal education too should evolve. However, that evolution should be based on what truly improves it and is suitable for Sri Lanka’s situation, and what the public finds beneficial. While the English language is of importance in the evolving world, promoting that language should be done in a practical and sustainable manner. While Sri Lanka will most likely see a day where the English language is the main language in which education is delivered, rushing it before the country is ready will not do any good to the education sector.