Islamabad:
During the consultation of the judges’ transfer case, a judge raised the question of whether the powers of the legal commission in Pakistan (JCP) can be made ineffective by permanent transfer of judges from one Supreme Court to another through executive orders.
A bench member also asked about the basic principle and criteria behind such transfers.
A five-member constitutional bench (CB) from the Supreme Court led by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar on Tuesday resumed to hear a series of petitions filed against the transfer of three provincial Supreme Court’s judges to Islamabad High Court (IHC) in February and the subsequent change in the Judges’ Square List.
Resumption of his argument in support of the transfer maintained legal lawyer for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Awan that no new appointments had been made and that the transferred judges did not require a new oath. He said the Supreme Court has already given up that seniority begins from the date of appointment.
Justice Shakeel Ahmed asked why the Law Secretary had clarified in the summary that the transferred judges did not need a new oath. AGP said the clarification was intended to avoid ambiguity in the message after the advisory approval.
He said that the then IHC high -rank Aamer Farooq had decided the seniority of the IHC judges.
“Justice Aamer Farooq was fully autonomous to determine seniority. Chief Justices and regulators of four high courts also did not raise any objections to the transfers.”
He said Justice Farooq made the decision based on a representation filed by five IHC judges against the transfer of new changes to the court and changes on the seniority list. Justice Farooq had rejected the representation, causing the judges to submit an appeal in the Supreme Court.
Justice Mazhar noted that the Council of the Service had not mentioned this representation or Justice Farooq’s decision under their arguments.
