HC judges' age: KBA seeks clarification

ISLAMABAD:

Pressure is mounting on the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) after the Karachi Bar Association (KBA) sought clarification over reports that JCP members have reached an agreement that candidates below the age of 45 will not be approved for appointment as judges of the high courts.

The JCP is scheduled to meet next week to consider nominations for judges of four high courts. A committee of the commission has already interviewed all shortlisted nominees.

KBA President Amir Nawaz Warraich has written to the JCP secretary, sending copies of the letter to all commission members.

According to sources, uncertainty has emerged among nominees below the age of 45 amid reports that JCP members are unwilling to approve their names despite their professional competence. Some of those affected are understood to be nominees for appointment to the Sindh High Court.

The KBA's letter referred to an earlier report published in The Express Tribune regarding the alleged understanding among the JCP members on the age issue.

"If the reported understanding reflects the Commission's actual practice, it raises a constitutional question of such gravity that the bar considers itself duty-bound to seek a clarification," it stated.

The bar association pointed out that the qualifications for appointment as a high court judge are prescribed under Article 193(2) of the Constitution.

It noted that through the Constitution (Twenty-Sixth Amendment) Act, 2024, Parliament deliberately reduced the minimum age for appointment from 45 years to 40 years.

"That was a considered exercise of the constituent power, reflecting Parliament's settled judgment that a member of the bar of forty years, with the requisite standing, is eligible for elevation," it stated.

It argued that the reported understanding does not merely operate below the Constitution but directly contradicts it by informally reviving the very age threshold that Parliament deliberately abolished.

It contended that the JCP is a constitutional body established under Article 175A and is empowered only to select candidates on merit from among those whom the Constitution already declares eligible.

"It is not empowered to prescribe eligibility," the letter said.

The KBA argued that determining qualifications for judicial office is a legislative and constituent function vested exclusively in Parliament under Article 239 of the Constitution.

"An internal understanding that treats otherwise eligible candidates aged forty to forty-five as unlikely to be approved, whatever their individual merit, is therefore a usurpation of a function the Constitution reserves to Parliament," the letter stated.

According to the KBA, such a practice would amount to a de facto amendment of Article 193(2), effectively nullifying the substance of the 26th Amendment and directly contradicting the intention of the legislature.