Islamabad:
After the adoption of the 26th constitutional amendment, adhocism seems to grow through the higher judiciary.
Despite the period of four months, the Pakistan Judicial Commission (JCP) has not yet sentenced a meeting to appoint permanent chief judges for the Sindh High Court, the High Court of Peshawar and the High Court of Islamabad.
The High Court of Balutchistan also remained without a permanent judge for more than three months. On May 19, the JCP approved the appointment of judge Muhammad Ejaz Swati as a chief judge of the BHC, but only for a period of two weeks. He retired on June 5.
Judge Rozi Khan Barech, who ranked second in the BHC former list, has now been appointed acting chief.
Likewise, judge Sardar Sarfraz Dogar has been as an acting chief of the High Court of Islamabad for four months. Its seniority is currently at the survey of the Supreme Court. Although the dispute may explain the delay in the appointment of a permanent IHC judge, no clear reason exists for the prolonged delay in the appointments for the other three high lessons.
Since the adoption of the 18th amendment, the JCP has not already delayed the process of appointing permanent chief judges for the high lessons.
Under the new constitutional arrangement, the executive occupies a dominant role in the appointment of judges to the higher judicial power. However, the superior judges, in particular the chief judge of Pakistan, made no serious effort to restore balance in the process of appointments.
During the mandate of the current CJP, judge Yahya Afridi, around fifty judges were appointed before the higher courts, the executive playing a key role in the appointment of them. No judge can now become a permanent judge without the support of the executive.
The government has thus succeeded in maintaining the acting chief judges “sharing the same ideas” in the main high lessons.
With the support of the former CJP Qazi Faez Isa, the government previously managed to raise the judge Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan from the High Court of Lahore to the Supreme Court, according to him because he was not their favorite choice to direct the LHC.
Currently, the executive would be reluctant to raise the CJ of outgoing LHC Alia Neelum, because the Punjab government would be comfortable with the current provincial judicial power.
We also learn that the executive remains undecided as to the appointment of a permanent chief judge for the high court of the Sindh.
“It is the PPP who will decide on the permanent judge of the SHC,” added a source.
The reports suggest that the legal minds of the PPP are divided on the appointment for the next SHC chief judge.
Likewise, judge Syed Mohammad Attic Shah, who was second in the list of PHC judges, was appointed acting chief of the High Court of Peshawar. The appointment of a permanent PHC chief judge is being delayed for known reasons.
Lawyers are increasingly expressing contempt for the judges of PHC and BHC for the appointment of acting chief judges.
We learn that the PHC judge, judge Ejaz Anwar, is not in the right books of powerful circles. Consequently, despite its seniority, it was not raised to the Supreme Court or appointed acting chief.
The same goes for judge Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhail, who, although appointed acting chief, could not obtain authorization from powerful circles. The reports also suggest that he is the victim of judicial policy, and his relations with certain higher judges are not cordial.
The current situation indicates that it is unlikely that the two superior judges will be appointed permanent chief judges of their respective high lessons.
Lawyer Abdul Moiz Jaferii commented Islamabad saying: “It is a way to continue the farce that is the new court of Dogar. There are a lot of good judges there, so let’s keep them all suspended and distracted”.
Speaking on Sindh, added Jaferii, it has the effect that a perpetual carrot is suspended before the oldest judges in the province.
“Let’s see what you can do to please us – without really wondering about doing something specific. Keeping the empty angle terrain, you keep everyone in the race. And when you don’t know for what you are running or how long is the race, you start running cautious. It’s good enough. And that’s exactly what they want.”
Lawyers believe that the higher judges, who are at the helm and the beneficiaries of the 26th amendment, must take measures to restore the institution, whose independence has been compromised during the last six months.
