Twentieth Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka

[6] A similar attempt by the Dudley Senanayake Government failed on 22 June 1968, again due to a prorogation of Parliament.

Particularly, the president was given the authority to dissolve the parliament after one year, and could use their executive and constitutional powers to appoint any person to a government office in their sole discretion without the need for Parliamentary consent.

[citation needed] On 22 September 2020, Attorney-at-Law Indika Gallage filed a petition challenging the draft bill in the Supreme Court.

[14] On 2 October 2020, Attorney General Dappula de Livera announced that the Supreme Court would decide whether the 20th Amendment should be passed through a public referendum or a two-thirds majority in parliament.

[16] On 20 October 2020, the Supreme Court ruled that certain clauses in the amendment required a public referendum instead of a parliamentary supermajority.

[21] At least 39 petitions challenging the constitutionality of the amendment were filed by opposition parties, including the Tamil National Alliance and Samagi Jana Balawegaya.

[17][18] The opposition party Samagi Jana Balawegaya criticised the amendment and deemed the government as paving the way for autocracy instead of democracy.

[23] Buddhist sects Amarapura Nikāya and Rāmañña Nikāya released a joint statement decrying the amendment, stating that it would "destroy the independence of the judiciary, the public service, [and] the system of elections while undermining the independence of Parliament and members of Parliament individually".

[26] Senior political scientist Jayadeva Uyangoda condemned the government decision to pass the amendment, calling it a "constitutional bombshell".