The Supreme Court’s main lawyer Akhtar Hussain resigned from his post as a member of the Pakistan Judicial Commission (JCP), invoking concerns about the controversies surrounding the judicial appointments.
Hussain, who was appointed three times by Pakistan Bar Council (PBC), submitted his resignation to chief judge Yahya Afridi, who heads the commission.
In his letter, he expressed his dissatisfaction with the recent process of selecting judges from the Supreme Court.
“On current controversies with regard to judicial appointments, I am unable to continue and, by this, resign as a member of JCP,” he wrote, asking the PBC to appoint a new representing in its place.
Despite the resignation, Hussain assured its continuous support for judicial independence and democratic institutions.
The resignation comes shortly after the JCP appointed six new judges to the Supreme Court, a decision which aroused criticism of certain legal and political circles.
The legislators of Pakistan Tehreek-e-insaf (PTI) and two judges of the Supreme Senior Court boycotted the process, raising questions about its transparency.
Earlier this month, the Judicial Commission asked for candidates for high lessons across the country, asking lists of five senior judges of each.
However, disputes concerning seniority and transfers – in particular before the High Court of Islamabad (IHC) – led an internal dissent.
A group of IHC judges has officially challenged the revised seniority list, arguing that a recently transferred judge should be placed at the bottom of the list instead of being considered for immediate promotion.
The departure of Hussain is the last challenge for the judicial commission of 13 members, which was restructured under the 26th constitutional amendment to include four legislators.
The commission, chaired by the chief judge of Pakistan, is responsible for the appointment of judges before the Supreme Court, the High Court and the Federal Sharia Court.
The resignation rekindled the debates on independence and the transparency of judicial appointments in Pakistan.
Legal experts and bar advice has long called for reforms to the process, arguing that it must be more structured and based on merit to maintain the credibility of the judiciary.
Earlier, the opposition chief Omar Ayub – who was part of four legislators appointed as members of the JCP – also submitted his resignation, further stressing the growing tensions within the Commission.
With the release of Hussain, Pakistan Bar Council should name a replacement in the coming days.
Meanwhile, the controversy on judicial appointments should remain a controversial question in the legal and political landscape of Pakistan.
In addition, the association of the bar of the High Court of Islamabad had filed a new request before the Supreme Court last week, contesting the authority of the president to transfer the judges without justification of public interest.
This marks the second major challenge to legal transfers in recent days.
Posed under article 184, paragraph 3, by the president of the bar, Riasat Ali Azad, the petition maintains that the president has no unlimited powers under article 200, paragraph 1, of the Constitution for Reallow the judges between high lessons.
He argues that legal transfers should only occur in the public interest.
The petition follows a similar decision of five judges from the High Court of Islamabad (IHC) filed a request at the Supreme Court of Pakistan, contesting judicial transfers and their impact on seniority.
The constitutional request of 49 pages, filed under article 184, paragraph 3, through the main lawyers MUNNIER A. MALIK and the lawyer Salahuddin, maintains that the president of Pakistan abused article 200 , paragraph 1, going beyond the authority of the judicial committee by transferring the judges.
