Islamabad:

The Legal Commission for Pakistan (JCP) with a majority of 9 to 4 nominated Friday five more judges for the constitutional bench (CB) for the Supreme Court.

The new members of CB are Justice Hashim Khan Kakar, Justice Salahuddin Panhwar, Justice Shakeel Ahmad, Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim. After their admission, the total number of CB judges has risen to 13 with three members from each province and one from Islamabad.

It is Learnt that During the Meeting, CB Head Justice Aminuddin Khan Suggested The Names, A Proposal Endorsed by Nine JCP Members Including Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, Justice Jamal Khan Khan Mandokhail, Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) Representative Ahsan Bhoon Bhoon General of Pakistan Mansoor Awan, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar and Three Members of the Treasury Bench.

However, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali, Justice Munib Akhtar and two PTI legislators – Barner Ali Zafar and Barrister Gohar Ali Khan – were sent from the majority, stating that all SC judges should be included in CB.

It also learned that Justice Mandokhail had recommended the names of Justice At Har Minallah and Justice Shahid Waheed for admission to CB, but a majority of JCP members did not approve this proposal.

The Commission at another meeting also nominated Justice Riazat Ali Sahar, Justice Abdul Hamid Bhurgri and Justice Nisar Ahmad Bhanbhro as judges of the constitutional benches in Sindh High Court.

No constitutional bench is created in any Supreme Court except SHC, where a judge who was number 9 on the seniority list has been nominated as a member of the constitutional bench.

There is a view in the bar that despite their seniority, disagreement is not included in CB. Justice Shah had suggested that most five judges should be included as members of constitutional benches.

No reason has been presented to ignore eight senior SHC judges while they make up CBS. The same is the situation in the Point Court, where the judges, who may have divergent statements about high -profile cases, have not been nominated for CB.

Attorneys also wonder how CB heads could recommend names of judges for constitutional benches. They say that heads of CBS will never recommend judges who are senior than them because they will no longer be able to lead the benches.

Earlier, the government representatives in JCP claimed that senior most judges in each province will be nominated for CBS. However, JCP did not follow the rule, and senior judges such as Justice Shafi Siddiqui and Justice At Har Minallah were not nominated as members of CB.

Abdul Moiz Jaferii Advocate said several constitutional judges “have been gifted” to the Supreme Court without any reasons granted or criteria given or discussed.

“This time – with the added cherry on top – the head of the constitutional bench called the judges he wanted, dispensing with the formality of asking JCP to decide individually which members would be part of the bench after just informing him that he needed more judges.”

Jaferii said things are “even better in Sindh,” where justice Riazat Ali Saher came to the constitutional bench after his former Stint in the judiciary ended with a non-confirmation, and his last appearance at a Supreme Court podium saw him quote from the wrong law.

“Meanwhile, the constitutional bench exposed the consultations from the military trial to a date in office. Asif Ghafoor, when DG ISPR once said that silence is also an expression.

“It seems that this constitutional bench has taken this mantra to the heart, where the inability to decide cases also looks more and more like a decision,” he added.

SC Senior Puisne -Judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, who disseminated from the majority decision, had demanded that the proposed rules provide a mechanism and criteria for nomination and decision of the number of judges before CBS before the Supreme Court and high courts.

“The Commission has already nominated and established a number of judges by the Supreme Court and Sindh High Court for CBS in the absence of mechanism or criteria that are in place.

“Therefore, there has been no logic or reason to support nomination and decision of the number of judges for CBS,” a nine-page letter written by Justice Shah told the JCP secretary in December.

Justice Shah stated that nomination and determination under Articles 191A and 202A in the Constitution cannot be performed in a vacuum, and JCP must first put an objective criterion through the proposed rules.

“The expansion of the existing CBS for the Supreme Court is coming up tomorrow [today]. Therefore, it is tender and mandatory for JCP to formulate a mechanism and criteria for nomination and decision of the judges for the constitutional benches in the general interest of the public. “

Justice Shah suggested that the criteria could include the number of reported judgments from the judges on the interpretation of the Constitution – including inserts or additional notes of constitutional law written by the judge while being part of a larger bench that heard important constitutional affairs. “The proposed rules are currently silent in this regard,” he said.

During the meeting on Friday, CJP decided to constitute the committees to establish criteria for appointing judges for all high courts and also for nomination of judges to CBS before the Supreme Court and all the high courts.

However, lawyers say this exercise will be meaningless if the current CB judges decide high -profile cases that influence national policy.

There are reports that a CB of 13 members can take petitions against judgment against judgment that found that PTI has the right to have reserved seats in the National Assembly. The decision has not yet been implemented.

Lawyers wonder how justice Aminuddin Khan could hear the petitions as majority judges had adopted a rigor against him and justice naeem Akhtar Afghan in the verdict.