• SLAWJ Patron, Retd. SC Judge, Justice Shiranee Tilakawardane notes that women in law face persistent risks, particularly sexual harassment and sextortion 
• These issues are compounded by traditional gender stereotypes, inflexible workplace structures, and limited access to mentoring 

The Judiciary is one of the most important organs of any country. It shapes the country’s discourse and social system. Sri Lanka Association of Women Judges (SLAWJ) Patron retired Supreme Court (SC) Judge, Justice Shiranee Tilakawardane is a pioneer in many respects, being the first female State Counsel, High Court (HC) Judge, Court of Appeal (CA) Judge, and the first female President of the CA. 

She has also served as the Acting Chief Justice on several occasions. The Daily Morning spoke to Justice Tilakawardane about the challenges faced by women in the Judiciary and the legal profession. 

Following are excerpts from the interview:

While the majority of lawyers in Sri Lanka are women, how would you assess female representation at all levels of the Judiciary? Do you believe that the current level of representation is sufficient, and what improvements would you suggest?

Female representation across all levels of the Judiciary remains far from equal, particularly in the Superior Courts (CA and SC). Although women made up 65% of the newly admitted attorneys in 2017, the profession and courtrooms are still largely dominated by men. This imbalance is even clearer in leadership as only three women served on the Bar Association’s Executive Committee in 2021, dropping to none in 2024/2025. Within the Judiciary, women account for just a third of the judges, with only two female Justices in the SC, one soon retiring, and three women out of 12 in the CA.

Women’s unique qualities should never be viewed as weaknesses. The legal system requires transformational change that goes beyond tokenism to embrace genuine diversity and inclusivity at every level of authority. Leadership must be judged on individual merit, not gender. Crucially, the Parliament must reform discriminatory laws and foster a culture sensitive to the barriers that women face. Until such deep reforms occur, progress towards true gender justice in the Judiciary will remain sporadic and incomplete.

What unique challenges do women face in the Judiciary, and in what areas does gender discrimination occur within the process of appointing judges?

A: The challenges faced by women in the Judiciary are essentially the challenges of women in the legal profession — magnified. Gender discrimination in appointments and promotions is often implicit, but no less damaging. Equal opportunity must be a guarantee, not an ideal.

Women in law face persistent risks, particularly sexual harassment and sextortion. These issues are compounded by traditional gender stereotypes, inflexible workplace structures, and limited access to mentoring. Such barriers hinder career advancement, creating underrepresentation, gender bias, and institutional discrimination. Evaluation criteria often favour traits stereotypically associated with men, undervaluing emotional intelligence or collaborative leadership – skills often attributed to women. Women from minority communities suffer intersectional discrimination, facing both gender and ethnic bias.

Sextortion, where power is exchanged for sexual favours, is a deeply corrosive form of abuse, operating both implicitly and explicitly. It silences victims and distorts justice, threatening not only individual dignity but also the integrity of democratic institutions. Sexual harassment – whether physical, verbal, or non-verbal – remains a serious concern. Without structural reform, transparency, and mentorship, these issues will persist. True equity demands that we confront these realities head-on, with zero tolerance and proactive institutional accountability.

What is your perspective on the role of female judges in promoting Judicial integrity? How can these values be instilled in one’s career to ensure fairness and impartiality in the legal system?

Judicial integrity is essential for both male and female members of the Judiciary. These values can be instilled through maintaining the judicial chamber in ways that don’t thwart the integrity of judges. By doing so, it can in fact create trust and confidence in the Judiciary among the community that it serves and further cultivate a practice of good leadership among the legal community itself, which is initiated from the bench. 

According to my experience as the first female HC Judge, I exercised innovation and integrity in my judgements. During my tenure as a HC Judge, there were two criminal defamation cases that arose, charging two newspapers with criminal defamation of the then-President. The accused was convicted in the first case while the other accused newspaper in the second case was acquitted. My reasoning was based on the importance of the right of free speech, the right to information, and that criminal defamation should not be weaponised to stifle legitimate opinion. This is just an example. But, it is the responsibility of everyone to protect the integrity.

Female judges often face challenges related to security, accommodation, dress codes, salaries, and work-life balance. What are your thoughts on these issues, and what measures can be taken to ensure that women in the Judiciary can balance their personal lives and careers effectively?

Of course. We know in our experience that female judges are more likely to be subject to threats, microaggressions, gender-based harassment, or intimidation. To address such issues, increased security protocols and measures for female judges should be introduced as needed as well as fast-tracked investigations into any threats or harassment with strong legal consequences. The accommodation offered to judges must include basic amenities, safety, and privacy, and gender-sensitive housing policies must be implemented. As well as the regular maintenance of accommodations to maintain standards and have options for flexible posting based on familial needs or health-related concerns. 

As a woman in the legal profession, despite women forming the majority of the population, they represent only 32% of the workforce due to a lack of an equal playing field. Key female-specific concerns – the care-related burden, the female body, and violence against women – remain unaddressed. Women shoulder 70% of unpaid domestic and elderly care, with studies showing their time divided between paid work, unpaid work, and minimal leisure, unlike men. The absence of paternity leave in our legal framework significantly hinders women’s progress. Countries like Sweden show that each month of paternity leave can increase a mother’s earnings by 10% and improve family life and child development.

In law, many women opt out of court practice after motherhood due to unsupportive, inflexible structures rooted in patriarchy. Success depends heavily on time, both in court and beyond, making it harder for women managing dual roles. Women are more frequently interrupted, mistaken for non-lawyers, excluded from prime roles, and burdened with ‘office housework.’ These stereotypes impact client perceptions too. We urgently need flexible work models, childcare at court, mentorship programmes, and modern dress code policies to support women and promote equality in the legal profession.

How can the Judiciary identify legally vulnerable witnesses, and what steps can be taken to protect them, particularly in the context of existing patriarchal notions within the legal system?

The Assistance to and Protection of Victims of Crime and Witnesses Act, No. 10 of 2023 is one of Sri Lanka’s most comprehensive legal frameworks for safeguarding victims and witnesses, particularly in sexual and gender-based violence-related (SGBV) cases. It ensures anonymity, legal aid, and security, and identifies vulnerable victims and witnesses, helping to close the gap between reported cases and successful prosecutions. Crucially, it dispels harmful myths and assumptions around SGBV, fostering a safer environment for reporting.

A survivor-centred approach must guide our response – respecting survivors’ wishes, rights, and confidentiality, and ensuring their safety and that of their families. Disclosure of identity should never occur without consent. Sentencing must reflect the severity of the harm, especially in cases involving repeated abuse, the abuse of power, familial violence, or vulnerable victims.

A rights-based and age-, gender-, and diversity-sensitive approach are essential – empowering all survivors equally and ensuring their full participation in justice processes. The law’s swift and efficient implementation are key, with deterrent sentencing helping to reduce impunity. Collaborative, multi-sectoral teams must work to support and rehabilitate women and children. Ultimately, fair, timely, and flexible justice depends on a safe and effective court process for all parties involved.

In recent decades, there has been a trend of appointing officers from the Attorney General’s (AG) Department to Apex Courts over career judges. How do you view this trend, and what impact does it have on the development and efficiency of the Judiciary?

This question is very important and must be addressed with care. I personally don’t notice any impact on the development and efficiency of the Judiciary but rather it enhances the Judiciary as State Attorneys bring a wealth of experience to the Judiciary. We know that they play a significant role within the Apex Courts in particular, as most of the matters heard within the courts are Fundamental Rights (FR) applications, public law and constitutional matters, which are all areas in which State Attorneys have more experience. Furthermore, late SC Justice Dr. A.R.B. Amerasinghe in his book on ‘Judicial Ethics’ has succinctly set out the names of the judges from the time of Independence. It clearly reflects that judges to the appellate courts have always been from the official bar (the AG’s Department), the unofficial bar and the Judiciary. To say otherwise is to go against recorded history and confuse the narrative.   

In recent judicial appointments, some senior female judges and officers have been overlooked for higher positions. Do you consider this a case of gender discrimination? If so, what steps should appointing authorities take to ensure a fair and merit-based selection process?

What we often witness is gender discrimination, both direct and systemic, within the judicial appointment process. Over the years, many senior female judges and officers have been overlooked for career advancement, despite their qualifications, experience, and merit. This reflects deep-rooted structural stereotypes and cultural biases, leading to a pattern where even less experienced male counterparts are promoted ahead of deserving women.

Such underrepresentation of women in senior judicial and leadership roles is a clear indication of persistent inequality. The situation is worsened by the lack of transparency in appointments, where decisions are often justified using vague and subjective terms, rather than objective benchmarks. Furthermore, women from minority, ethnic, religious, and socio-economic backgrounds face intersecting forms of discrimination, making their path to advancement even more difficult. If left unaddressed, this trend risks undermining meritocracy, diminishing diversity of thought in the Judiciary, and deterring future generations of women from entering or progressing in judicial careers. We need transparent, publicly-available, and merit-based appointment criteria clearly defining experience, integrity, judgements delivered, and legal acumen to ensure fair and equal access to leadership roles for all qualified individuals, regardless of gender or background.

Female judges are sometimes criticised for approaching certain cases with a strong feminist perspective, which, according to some, affects the verdict. How do you respond to these allegations, and how should judicial impartiality be maintained while addressing gender-related issues in legal proceedings?

Equality is a fundamental grundnorm – central to the integrity of the Judiciary. To disregard it is to violate our core values. Disappointingly, Sri Lanka still lacks a code of ethics for judges. Before retiring, I drafted and translated one into all three languages, and it was ratified by three SC Judges, but it was never implemented. In its absence, we rely on the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct – independence, impartiality, equality, integrity, propriety, competence and diligence – which must be strictly applied without fear or favour.

Too often, allegations against female judges stem from deep-rooted gender bias, not genuine concern. All judges bring their personal experiences to the bench, and must be trained in judicial dexterity to be aware, sensitive, and free from explicit, implicit and confirmation bias. Feminist approaches are unfairly criticised despite their aim of ensuring equality before the law and acknowledging power imbalances and social contexts. Women must define themselves, not be limited by patriarchal myths or stereotypes. Men need not feel threatened by this shift; it is part of humanity’s progress, as echoed in the Ubuntu Declaration. Judicial decisions must be gender-sensitive, empathetic, and address systemic inequalities – not reinforce them.

In countries such as the United States, judges follow specific judicial philosophies that shape their interpretations of the law. What is your opinion on this approach? Should Sri Lankan judges develop their own judicial philosophies, and how could this contribute to the evolution of our legal system and jurisprudence?

Judicial philosophies offer a vital framework for the consistent and unbiased interpretation of the law, fostering legal certainty and public trust. In Sri Lanka, adopting such philosophies rooted in our own values and history can lead to context-sensitive rulings and better responses to unique legal challenges. They help strengthen constitutional governance, balance state power and individual rights, and promote intellectual clarity in legal reasoning. However, we must also embrace global legal thought in all its diversity; limiting ourselves would be like a frog in a well – cut off from growth, unable to stay relevant in a dynamic, evolving legal world.

In many foreign countries, judges have the freedom to speak to the media and maintain a public presence. What is your opinion on this practice? Should Sri Lanka adopt a similar approach, or do you believe that judicial restraint in public discourse is necessary to maintain impartiality?

Judicial integrity is the cornerstone of a just legal system, ensuring that decisions are made with impartiality, independence, competence, and diligence. In today’s digital era and amidst the Fourth Industrial Revolution, it is vital to re-examine judicial values within this evolving context. The ethical use of social media by judges is paramount, as their online activity even in personal capacities can raise serious ethical concerns, including unintended bias, improper communications, or conflicts of interest. Given the public visibility of such interactions, it risks undermining public confidence in judicial impartiality and threatens the integrity and fairness of the justice system itself.

What role do female judges play in promoting access to justice, particularly for marginalised communities and vulnerable individuals?

Female judges play an essential role in the Judiciary by bringing diverse perspectives, building public trust, and promoting inclusivity in our legal systems. First and foremost, the Judiciary must serve as a safeguard against the abuse of power by both the state and individuals. It is our constitutional duty to ensure that all enacted laws are consistent with the FR guarantees such as the freedoms of speech, religion, and the due process. The courts provide a vital forum for redress, allowing individuals to challenge violations of their rights and to seek fair and impartial adjudication. In doing so, we not only address individual injustices but also set legal precedents that strengthen protections for all.

Additionally, the Judiciary is responsible for balancing competing rights and interests, particularly in complex or ambiguous legal contexts. It is our role to weigh both sides with care, fairness, and equality, ensuring that our decisions uphold the principles of justice at their core. Ultimately, the Judiciary must function as the guardian of constitutional values, reinforcing the idea that every individual deserves fairness, equity, and protection under the law. This is a sacred responsibility – one that must be fulfilled without fear or favour.

As a judge who has witnessed various political developments throughout your career, how would you evaluate the checks and balances within the Sri Lankan system? In your view, how has this affected the independence of the Judiciary?

A judge cannot operate in complete isolation from the realities of the society that they serve. Judicial values must reflect the cultural, political, and socio-economic context of the region. Judicial immunity and consistent judicial tenure are essential to preserve independence, empowering judges to decide without fear or favour. I also believe in the development of judicial activism to uphold justice in evolving societies. Above all, transparency is key; it strengthens public confidence, ensures fairness, and upholds the right to a fair trial. A truly just system is one where openness permeates proceedings, rulings, and verdicts, building trust through accountability.

As a senior retired Justice, what measures do you propose to strengthen judicial ethics in Sri Lanka and prevent corruption among court officers?

Judicial ethics must be strengthened through a multifaceted and proactive approach. I advocate for an independent Judicial Ethics Commission to monitor, investigate, and enforce standards. Mandatory ethics training, with a focus on gender, human rights, and anti-corruption, is vital. Appointments and promotions must be based on merit and integrity, not politics. We must ensure safe, anonymous reporting of unethical conduct. Digitalising court processes from case tracking to evidence submission can significantly reduce manipulation and bribery. Finally, senior judges must actively mentor and review junior colleagues to foster a lasting culture of integrity and accountability within the Judiciary.

You have been actively involved in the career development of Sri Lankan judges and legal education. What reforms do you propose to improve career progression in the Judiciary and address challenges such as language barriers, high tuition fees, and the regulation of private degree-awarding institutions?

Equity, accessibility and quality must guide systemic change in the legal profession. This begins with law students, who need accurate insight into professional demands, ethical responsibility and the importance of standing against discrimination. Mentorship and training are vital. By investing in young lawyers, we cultivate a dynamic, competent and honourable legal community. I strongly support formal mentoring, career advancement and leadership development programmes, as well as informal women’s networks to aid career progression. We must push for gender parity in leadership, promote a parent-friendly profession such as introducing crèches and provide legal training and resources in all three national languages. Scholarships, tuition waivers, and student loan schemes must support students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Legal education and judicial training must be modernised, with mandatory continuous professional development on ethics, digital literacy, and emerging legal challenges, accessible online. Crucially, targeted mentorship for women, minorities, and those from underrepresented regions must be implemented to ensure an inclusive Judiciary. This is how we build a robust, fair, and forward-looking legal system for all.

As the Patron of the SLAWJ, what initiatives do you propose to strengthen and expand women’s engagement in the legal sector, particularly within the Judiciary?

The SLAWJ was established to promote the interests and welfare of female judges, advance gender equity within the Judiciary and society, and foster professional excellence. The Association aims to address gender disparities, eliminate bias and discrimination, and empower women to succeed in the legal profession. It focuses on developing judicial leaders and increasing women’s representation in leadership roles, while supporting women judges in upholding equality, judicial independence, and the rule of law.

To achieve these goals, the Association will create a supportive network and mentorship programmes to reduce isolation, improve mental well-being, and build a strong community among women judges. It will also provide training, resources, and promote the recognition of female judges’ achievements.

Formed in response to the International Association of Women Judges (IAWJ), the Sri Lankan chapter seeks affiliation with this prestigious global body, which offers international webinars, lectures, mentoring, and facilitates cross-border discussions on judicial education, wellbeing, and global issues such as environment, conflict, and court-related violence. The IAWJ’s work during crises, such as the Taliban’s atrocities against women in Afghanistan, highlights its vital international role in safety, children’s wellbeing, and the development of international law.