Islamabad:
The Pakistan Judicial Commission (JCP) by a majority of 9 to 4 appointed five other judges on the constitutional bench (CB) of the Supreme Court on Friday.
The new CB members are judge Hashim Khan Kakar, judge Salahuddin Panhwar, judge Shakeel Ahmad, judge Aamer Faroo and judge Ishtiaq Ibrahim. After their inclusion, the total number of CB judges increased to 13 with three members of each province and one from Islamabad.
It is read that daring the meeting, cb head justice aminuddin khan suggested the names, a proposition endorsed by nine jcp include chief justice of pakistan yahya afrida, justice jamal khan mandokhail, pakistan bar council (PBC) Reprintable Ahsan Bhoon, Attorney Pakistan Mansoor Awan, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar and Three Members of the Treasury Banc.
However, judge Syed Mansoor Ali, Judge Munib Akhtar and two PTI legislators – Barriste Ali Zafar and lawyer Gohar Ali Khan – have had the majority, declaring that all SC judges should be included in the CB.
He also learned that judge Mandokhail had recommended the names of judge athar Minallah and judge Shahid Waheed for inclusion in the CB, but a majority of JCP members have not approved this proposal.
The committee of another meeting also appointed judge Riazat Ali Sahar, judge Abdul Hamid Bhurgri and judge Nisar Ahmad Bhanbhro as judges of the Constitutional Bancs of the High Court of the Sindh.
No constitutional bench is created before a high court, except the SHC where a judge who was number 9 on the seniority list was appointed member of the constitutional bench.
There is a perception in the bar according to which despite their seniority, the dissident judges are not included in the CB. Judge Shah had proposed that most of the five senior judges be included as members for the constitutional benches.
No reason has been presented for ignoring eight superior SHC judges while constituting CBS. The same applies the situation in the Supreme Court where judges who can have divergent opinions on high -level affairs are not appointed to CB.
Lawyers also wonder how CB chiefs could recommend the names of judges for constitutional benches. They say that the heads of the CBS will never recommend the judges, who are senior than them, because they will no longer be able to direct the benches.
Earlier, representatives of the JCP government claimed that most of the judges in each province will be appointed to the CBS. However, the JCP did not follow the rule and the higher judges such as judge Shafi Siddiqui and judge Athar Minallah were not appointed CB members.
Abdul Moiz Jaferii Advocate said that more constitutional judges “have been offered” to the Supreme Court without any reason or the criteria given or discussed.
“This time – with the additional cherry at the top – the chief of the constitutional bench appointed the judges he wanted, providing the formality of asking the JCP to determine individually which members would be part of the bench after simply declared that he needed more judges.”
Jaferii said that things are “even better in the Sindh”, where judge Riazat Ali Saher went to the constitutional bench after his previous passage in the judiciary ended with a non-confirmation and his last appearance in a podium of the Supreme Court saw him quoting bad law.
“Meanwhile, the constitutional bench postponed the hearings of the military court on a date of power. Asif Ghafoor as CEO ISPR said one day that silence was also an expression.
“It seems that this constitutional bench has taken this mantra to heart, where the inability to decide on cases is also increasingly like a decision,” he added.
The main judge of PUT SC SC SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH, who is understanding of the majority decision, had required that the proposed rules should provide a mechanism and criteria for the appointment and determination of the number of judges for the CBS of the Supreme Court and the High Court.
“The Commission has already appointed and determined a certain number of judges of the Supreme Court and the High Court of the Sindh for the CBS in the absence of any mechanism or criterion in place.
“Consequently, there was no logic or reason to support the appointment and determination of the number of judges for the CBS,” said a letter of nine pages written by judge Shah to the secretary of the JCP in December.
Judge Shah said that the appointment and determination under articles 191a and 202a of the Constitution cannot be carried out in a vacuum and that the JCP must first file an objective criterion through the proposed rules.
“The extension of the existing CBS of the Supreme Court arrives tomorrow [today]. It is therefore imperative and compulsory for the JCP to formulate a mechanism and criteria for the appointment and determination of judges for constitutional benches in the general interest of the public. “”
Judge Shah suggested that the criteria may include the number of judgments reported by judges on the interpretation of the Constitution, including dissections or additional tickets on the constitutional law which have been written by the judge while being part of a wider bench hearing of major constitutional affairs. “The proposed rules are currently silent in this regard,” he said.
On Friday, during the meeting, the CJP decided to constitute the committees to set criteria for appointment of judges of all the high lessons and also for the appointment of judges to the CBS of the Supreme Court and to all the high lessons.
However, lawyers claim that this exercise will be futile, if CB’s current judges decide high -level affairs that have an impact on national policy.
There is information according to which a CB of 13 members can take examination of examination against the judgment which judged that the PTI had the right to obtain seats reserved for the National Assembly. The decision has not yet been implemented.
Lawyers wonder how Judge Aminuddin Khan could hear the revision petitions when the majority judges had adopted a stark on him and Judge Naeem Akhtar Afghan in judgment.
