Islamabad:
During the hearing of the judge transfer case, a judge raised the question of whether the powers of the Pakistan Judicial Commission (JCP) can be made ineffective by the permanent transfer of the judges from a high court to another by decrees.
A member of the bench has also inquired about the basic principle and the criteria behind these transfers.
A constitutional bench of five members (CB) of the Supreme Court led by judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar heard a multitude of petitions deposited against the transfer of three judges from the High Provincial Court to the High Court of Islamabad (CIM) in February and to the following change of the list of judges of the judges.
Representing his argument in support of the transfer, the Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Awan argued that no new appointment had been made and that the transferred judges did not need a new oath. He said the Supreme Court has already judged that seniority is starting from the date of appointment.
Judge Shakeel Ahmed asked why the legal secretary had specified in the summary that the transferred judges did not need a new oath. The AGP said that clarification aimed to avoid the ambiguity of notification after advisory approval.
He said that the IHC chief judge, Aamer Farooq, had determined the seniority of the IHC judges.
“Judge Aamer Farooq was entirely independent in determining seniority. The judges and registrars of the heads of four high lessons have also raised any objection to transfers.”
He declared that Judge Farooq made the decision on the basis of a representation filed by five judges of the CIH against the transfer of new modifications to the court and the modifications of the seniority list. Judge Farooq had refused the representation, which prompted the judges to appeal before the Supreme Court.
Judge Mazhar noted that the petitioner councils had not mentioned this representation or the decision of Judge Farooq during their arguments.
