Judges evaluation: JCP makes headways

The Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) has moved closer to formalising a framework for the annual performance evaluation of high court judges, with a key committee reaching broad agreement on proposed rules aimed at setting measurable standards under Article 175-A (20) of the Constitution.

A meeting of the JCP committee, led by Justice Aamir Farooq, was held on Tuesday to deliberate on the draft rules. Other members of the committee include Mansoor Awan, Ali Zafar and Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) representative Ahsan Bhoon.

The meeting continued for more than two hours.

It is learnt that a consensus has been reached among committee members on the proposed rules for evaluating the annual performance of high court judges. However, one member of the committee told The Express Tribune that while agreement has been reached on several points, one more meeting may still be required for formal approval.

According to the understanding reached so far, a proposed evaluation committee comprising judicial members of the JCP will assess the quality of high court judges. Marks will be allocated on both the quality and quantity of judicial decisions. In addition, marks will also be awarded for punctuality, efficiency and case management.

It has further been suggested that negative marks should also be allocated based on the conduct of judges.

Under the proposed mechanism, the evaluation committee of each high court will share its performance report on judges with the JCP, which will then take a final decision. However, it has been recommended that complaints of misconduct will not be considered by the evaluation committees.

Under the constitution, if the JCP, by majority, resolves that a particular judge is inefficient, the matter will be referred to the Supreme Judicial Council for initiating proceedings of misconduct against them.

A member of the JCP committee told The Express Tribune that numerical scores will be assigned to judges during the evaluation of their performance. The purpose of allocating numbers, the member said, is to ensure transparency in the evaluation process.

Meanwhile, the JCP is also holding meetings to consider the confirmation of 40 additional judges of the high courts. Following the passage of the 26th constitutional amendment, these judges were appointed to various high courts. There is a growing perception that the executive has assumed a dominant role in the appointment and confirmation of judges.

Lawyers believe that the confirmation of these 40 judges presents a major challenge for the chief justices, particularly in an environment where the executive is seen as exercising decisive influence over JCP decision-making.

There are reports that judicial members of the JCP have reservations regarding the confirmation of some of the additional judges. Observers say it will be crucial to see how the judicial members of the commission evolve their strategy in the prevailing circumstances.