Islamabad:
Judge of the Supreme Court Syed Mansoor Ali Shah urged the Pakistan Judicial Commission (JCP) to share the minutes of all his meetings during the mandate of Pakistan Yahya Afridi.
In a letter written on June 25 to the secretary of the JCP, Judge Shah has been concerned not to share the minutes of the JCP meetings to the public.
“I raise a question of institutional concern: the judgment by the commission of the practice of the publication of the minutes of its meetings to the public,” said the letter.
Judge Shah believes that the judiciary, as a tendency for other state institutions, must be held to the highest standards of openness and public responsibility.
“The appointment of judges is a public act with deep consequences. The inhabitants of Pakistan have the right to know how the judges of the Superior Court of the country are selected, what deliberations take place and if the constitutional standards are applied in good faith.
“The opacity which now surrounds the functioning of the Commission is not healthy, undemocratic and not in accordance with the image of the Supreme Court as a guardian of constitutional values”, indicates the letter.
He; Consequently, urges the commission that the minutes of all JCP meetings held during the mandate of the current president (CJP Afridi) is published to the public, in accordance with previous practice.
Abdul Moiz Jaferii Advocate said that the central premise of newly instituted processes linked to the judiciary was that the method and the process of judicial appointments were made more transparent.
A basic characteristic of this transparency was the release of the minutes that allow people to see the determination process. It has now stopped. Noon, he adds.
After the adoption of the 26th constitutional amendment, the executive has dominance in the process of appointment of judges as well as the selection of judges for the constitutional benches.
There is no explanation because of the reason why the superior judges were not appointed for the constitutional benches before the Supreme Court as well as the High Court of the Sindh.
There is no explanation to explain why the dissident judges are sidelined by the Commission.
Recently, the JCP ignored the appointment of most judges for their appointment as the main judges of the High Court.
A lawyer says they were simply ignored because they were not judges of the same ideas of the government.
Similarly, with a valid reason, some higher judges, in particular the judge of the High Court of Peshawar, Ejaz Anwar, were not appointed for the appointment of judge SC.
There is no explanation like the way the JCP changed its opinion on a judge whose integrity was in question a year ago.
It is also found that the majority of lawyers supported by the government are appointed high court judges during the mandate of CJP Afridi.
Lawyers whose integrity and skills are without doubt have not been appointed for appointments because they were not the similar views of the government ‘
The CJP Afridi has so far been unable to develop a strategy to minimize the influence of the executive in the appointment of judges.
About fifty judges are appointed before the high lessons as well as the Supreme Court after the adoption of the 26th constitutional amendment.
During the mandate of the former CJP Qazi Faez Isa, the committee’s minutes working under the Practices and Procedure of the Supreme Court were shared on the Supreme Court website. However, this practice was interrupted during the former CJP Yahya Afridi.
