Nepotism charge: Lawyers cry foul over naming of PHC judges
Allege that the nominees are cronies of chief justice
ISLAMABAD:
A large number of lawyers from Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) protested outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday against the Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s (JCP) October 17 decision, which they alleged had endorsed four nominees for the Peshawar High Court (PHC) on the basis of ‘nepotism’.
The lawyers, who are the office-bearers of different bar associations of the K-P, met the chairman of parliamentary committee on judges’ appointment, Naveed Qamar, as well as Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Kamran Murtaza, to express their concerns regarding the JCP’s recommendations about the appointment of four PHC additional judges. The lawyers also submitted a resolution with the Chief Justice of Pakistan.
According to the Peshawar High Court Bar Association’s resolution, the recent nominations made by the JCP for the appointment of judges in PHC does not fulfill the merit criteria for a number of reasons. The lawyers, in a written statement, stated that the nominees do not have requisite competence and credibility.
They have also alleged that the nominees are the cronies of the chief justice, one nominee Haider Ali did belong to the chamber of CJP and Ghazanfar Qazi was class fellow of PHC chief justice. They also claimed that the representatives of the bar associations in JCP had strongly opposed the recommendation of these names for PHC judges.
The lawyers have urged the parliamentary committee not to approve the commission’s recommendations in this matter. They also threatened that if the nominations, despite their reservations, are confirmed by the parliamentary committee then they shall boycott the oath-taking ceremony at PHC and would hold protest.
Meanwhile, SCBA has passed a resolution expressing serious concern over the appointment of judges in the superior courts. SCBA, in its annual general meeting, resolved that the constitutional amendment in Article 175-A on the appointment of superior court judges should be reviewed.
“A committee of senior lawyers and representatives of the bar associations and bar councils will hold consultations to draft recommendations for its amendment,” said the resolution.
The SCBA regrets that composition of JCP has been “hijacked by judges while representatives of lawyers, the government and parliament have been reduced to’ rubber stamps”.
“Even more regrettable is the widely shared perception that some members of the JCP have bypassed merit and are exerting their personal bias, prejudices and associations in selection of names nominated by their respective high courts”, says the resolution.
The bar also decided to lobby with parliamentarians for a constitutional amendment so that appointment of judges does not remain solely within the discretion of judges themselves.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 30th, 2014.
A large number of lawyers from Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) protested outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday against the Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s (JCP) October 17 decision, which they alleged had endorsed four nominees for the Peshawar High Court (PHC) on the basis of ‘nepotism’.
The lawyers, who are the office-bearers of different bar associations of the K-P, met the chairman of parliamentary committee on judges’ appointment, Naveed Qamar, as well as Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Kamran Murtaza, to express their concerns regarding the JCP’s recommendations about the appointment of four PHC additional judges. The lawyers also submitted a resolution with the Chief Justice of Pakistan.
According to the Peshawar High Court Bar Association’s resolution, the recent nominations made by the JCP for the appointment of judges in PHC does not fulfill the merit criteria for a number of reasons. The lawyers, in a written statement, stated that the nominees do not have requisite competence and credibility.
They have also alleged that the nominees are the cronies of the chief justice, one nominee Haider Ali did belong to the chamber of CJP and Ghazanfar Qazi was class fellow of PHC chief justice. They also claimed that the representatives of the bar associations in JCP had strongly opposed the recommendation of these names for PHC judges.
The lawyers have urged the parliamentary committee not to approve the commission’s recommendations in this matter. They also threatened that if the nominations, despite their reservations, are confirmed by the parliamentary committee then they shall boycott the oath-taking ceremony at PHC and would hold protest.
Meanwhile, SCBA has passed a resolution expressing serious concern over the appointment of judges in the superior courts. SCBA, in its annual general meeting, resolved that the constitutional amendment in Article 175-A on the appointment of superior court judges should be reviewed.
“A committee of senior lawyers and representatives of the bar associations and bar councils will hold consultations to draft recommendations for its amendment,” said the resolution.
The SCBA regrets that composition of JCP has been “hijacked by judges while representatives of lawyers, the government and parliament have been reduced to’ rubber stamps”.
“Even more regrettable is the widely shared perception that some members of the JCP have bypassed merit and are exerting their personal bias, prejudices and associations in selection of names nominated by their respective high courts”, says the resolution.
The bar also decided to lobby with parliamentarians for a constitutional amendment so that appointment of judges does not remain solely within the discretion of judges themselves.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 30th, 2014.