Islamabad:
After the passage of the 26th constitutional amendment, adhocism seems to be growing over the overall judiciary.
Despite the four -month lapse, the Legal Commission for Pakistan (JCP) has not yet summoned a meeting to appoint permanent head of Sindh High Court, Peshawar High Court and Islamabad High Court.
Balochistan High Court also remained without a permanent chief law for more than three months. On May 19, JCP approved the appointment of Justice Muhammad Ejaz Swati as BHC Chief Justice, but only for a period of two weeks. He retired on June 5th.
Justice Rozi Khan Rotch, who was second on BHC’s seniority list, has now been named functioning Chief Justice.
Similarly, justice Sardar Sarfraz Dogar has served as acting Chief Justice of the Islamabad High Court for the past four months. His seniority is currently under challenge in the Supreme Court. While the trial may explain the delay in appointing a permanent IHC higher, there is no clear reason for the long -term delay in appointments for the other three high courts.
Since the passage of the 18th amendment, JCP has not previously delayed the process of appointing permanent head of the high courts.
According to the new constitutional scheme, the executive has a dominant role in the appointment of judges of the overall judiciary. However, senior judges, especially Chief Justice of Pakistan, have not made any serious effort to restore balance in the appointment process.
During the current CJP, justice Yahya Afridi, approx. 50 judges to the overall courts where the director plays a key role in nominating many of them. No judge can now become a permanent Supreme Court without the executive support.
The government has thus succeeded in maintaining “like -minded” acting chief contemporary in central high courts.
With the backing of the former CJP Qazi Faez Isa, the government previously managed to raise Justice Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan from Lahore High Court to the Supreme Court, reportedly because he was not their favorite choice to lead LHC.
At present, it is reportedly reluctant to raise the current LHC CJ Alia Neelum, as the Punjab government is said to be comfortable with the current provincial judiciary.
It is also learned that the exercise remains indecisive with regard to the appointment of a permanent head of the Sindh High Court.
“It’s PPP who will decide on SHC’s permanent head of justice,” a source added.
Reports suggest that PPP -Juridic minds are shared about the nomination for the next SHC higher.
Similarly, justice Syed Mohammad Attique Shah, who was number two on the seniority list of PHC judges, has been appointed to the acting Supreme Court of Peshawar High Court. The appointment of a permanent PHC chef is delayed for known reasons.
Lawyers are increasingly vocal about the ignoring of senior Puisne judges in PHC and BHC in the appointment of acting boss Justices.
It is learned that PHC judge Justice Ejaz Anwar is not in the good books with powerful circles. Despite his seniority, he was neither increased to the Supreme Court nor appointed to functioning Chief Justice.
The same goes for Justice Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhail, who, although he was appointed to the acting Supreme Court, could not secure approval from powerful circles. Reports also suggest that he is a victim of court policy, and his relationship with some older judges is not cordial.
The current situation indicates that both senior judges will probably not be appointed permanent head of their respective high courts.
Attorney Abdul Moiz Jaferii commented on Islamabad and said, “It’s a way to continue Farce, the new Dogar court. There are a lot of good judges there, so let’s keep them all hanging and distracted.”
In a talk about Sindh, Jaferii added, it has the effect of a perpetual carrot being dangling for the senior-most judges in the province.
“Let’s see what you can do to please us – without us really asking you to do anything specific. By keeping the corner court empty, you are all in the race. And when you don’t know what you are fighting for or how long the race you start running gently. It’s good enough. And that’s exactly what they want.”
Attorneys believe that older judges who are at the helm and recipients of the 26th amendment must take steps to restore the institution whose independence has been compromised in the last six months.
