All eyes on IHC now

JCP approves nomination of additional judges

Listen to article

ISLAMABAD:

Following the conviction of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan and his spouse, Bushra Bibi, in the £190 million Al-Qadir Trust case, all eyes are now on the Islamabad High Court (IHC) as it prepares to hear the appeals against the ruling.

The composition of the IHC bench handling these appeals will be crucial, as nearly all of Imran's previous appeals against convictions in the recent past were heard by benches led by IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq.

These benches have either suspended or overturned the former prime minister's convictions.

For instance, his conviction in the cypher case was set aside by a bench led by Justice Aamer Farooq.

Similar to the 190 million pounds case, he had been handed the maximum sentence in the case.

In the same vein, PTI has raised eyebrows over why its high-stakes cases seem to always land on benches headed by Chief Justice Aamer Farooq. Imran Khan himself has raised a flag, seeking the recusal of the IHC CJ from these cases on grounds of 'bias'.

Likewise, Imran Khan had also moved a formal complaint against IHC CJ Aamer Farooq in the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) for allegedly violating his oath of office and the judicial code of conduct.

In his complaint, the former prime minister accused the IHC CJ of bias and malice against him, asserting that this had led to the denial of a fair trial and due process, thus violating his constitutional rights under Articles 4, 9, and 10A.

"The respondent is actuated by bias and malice against the complainant. The respondent has been instrumental in denying the complainant fair trial and due process as well as his liberty, in violation of his fundamental rights under, inter alia, articles 4, 9 and 10A of the Constitution," read the complaint filed by Imran Khan.

The PTI founder further maintained in the complaint that the IHC CJ had either repeatedly ignored requests by his fellow judges to act against blatant interference in the functioning of the court by state agencies, or had actively played a part in ensuring that such interference continued unabated.

In light of these developments, the government has been uneasy about the six IHC judges' letter.

It has been witnessed that after six IHC judges' letter, the majority of high-profile cases are being heard by the benches led by the IHC CJ.

Following this, the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) approved the nominations of two judges for appointment to the IHC. This has raised speculation about whether these newly appointed judges will be included in the bench handling Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi's appeals.

The CJP typically does not assign important cases to additional judges.

In a related development, the JCP on Friday held two separate meetings for considering nominations for the positions of additional judges at the Islamabad High Court (IHC) and the Balochistan High Court (BHC).

The meetings, held at the Supreme Court building in the federal capital, were chaired by Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi.

In the first meeting, the commission, by a majority vote of its total membership, nominated Islamabad District & Session Judge Muhammad Azam Khan and Advocate Supreme Court Inaam Ameen Minhas for their appointment as additional judges at the IHC.

In the second meeting, the JCP unanimously nominated Muhammad Asif and Muhammad Ayub Khan—both advocates of the Supreme Court as additional judges at the BHC. The council nominated Muhammad Najam-ud-Din Mengal for the same position with a majority vote. Mengal is also an advocate of the Supreme Court.

"In both meetings, the commission unanimously decided that nominees who did not secure the required majority of the total membership of the JCP for finalisation of their nominations this time may be re-nominated for future vacancies," said a statement issued by the SC registrar's office.