JCP again ignores IHC senior puisne judge

ISLAMABAD:

Once again, the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) has overlooked Islamabad High Court (IHC) senior puisne judge Mohsin Akhtar Kayani while filling vacancies in the Supreme Court.

In its Tuesday meeting, only one JCP member, Justice Munib Akhtar, voted for Kayani’s elevation to the SC. No other judicial member of the commission, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi, Chief Justice Federal Constitutional Court Amin-ud-Din Khan, and Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi supported the motion.

There is no justification for not elevating Justice Kayani to the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, who is already working as an acting SC judge, was proposed to be appointed as a permanent judge of the SC.

Earlier, CJP Afridi was interested in appointing Aurangzeb as IHC chief justice, but majority of the JCP members, especially those belonging to the executive branch, did not agree with the idea. Instead, they voted for the appointment of Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar as the IHC CJ.

Justice Dogar was one of the three judges who were transferred to the IHC from other high courts in February.

A senior lawyer said that Justice Miangul Hassan Augranzeb is an image-conscious judge and that was the reason why the government did not support his appointment as IHC CJ.

The executive branch has gained dominance in the JCP after the passage of the 26th Amendment.

Nor have the judicial members of the JCP been able to develop any strategy to reduce the executive’s dominant role in the commission.

Earlier, the JCP by majority did not approve a proposal to appoint Justice Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhail as Chief Justice of Balochistan High Court (BHC).

The commission on Tuesday unanimously approved his nomination as BHC CJ.

There is no justification as to why he was ignored then but elevated to the same position this time. Interestingly, members of the judiciary have also changed their attitude towards him.

The five IHC judges who last year had written a letter against alleged interference by intelligence agencies in judicial functions have faced a tough time. Nor have they succeeded in getting support from their fellow judges.

Firstly, the Chief Justices as well as CJP Yahya Afridi approved the transfer of three judges from different high courts to the IHC. Since these transfers, the five judges, especially Justice Kayani, have been sidelined. The judges also approached the SC but their grievances could not be redressed.

After the passage of the 27th Amendment to the Constitution, these judges have limited seats.

After the resignation of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Athar Minallah from the Supreme Court, there were reports that some IHC judges may also resign. However, they are resisting and have challenged the 27th constitutional amendment in the apex court.

Likewise, they have also challenged the constitutionality of the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) judge transfer case. Their appeal in court has been dismissed by the FCC on the basis of lack of prosecution.

Now efforts are being made to force Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri to resign.

A division bench of the IHC headed by Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, while ignoring an order of a larger bench of the SC, has sought a record from the Higher Education Commission (HEC) regarding the degree of Justice Jahangiri.

Earlier, the bench headed by Justice Dogar had restrained Justice Jagangiri from judicial work. The interim order had been set aside by the SC. The SC had expected the IHC division bench to first decide whether the quo warranto petition against Justice Jahangiri was maintainable.

Instead of deciding on the objections, the IHC bench on Tuesday sought the HEC record. Even no notice has been issued to the respondent judge.

There are several issues that need to be addressed in this case.

Firstly, the same case is already pending in the Sindh High Court. Likewise, there is a need to determine the right forum first. Some judges have already expressed the view that only the Supreme Judicial Council (SHC) can proceed against a judge and no other forum can remove a judge.

The same case is also pending in the Sindh High Court. The IHC has ignored this aspect and decided to proceed with the case.

There is also a need to decide whether Justice Dogar can hear Justice Jahangiri’s case as Justice Jahangiri was among the five judges who challenged Justice Dogar’s transfer in the IHC. Earlier, Justice Jahangiri had also raised the issue of bias in this case.

It is a fact that the relationship of the five IHC judges with the executive branch is not cordial, but they are given a hard time by their own fellow judges.