For speedy justice: Senate views prospect of part-time judges
House leader says senior advocates can serve on the bench briefly
House leader says senior advocates can serve on the bench briefly. PHOTO: EXPRESS
ISLAMABAD:
The upper house of parliament recently converted itself into a whole committee to consider proposals for speedy and inexpensive justice – one of which is appointing part-time judges.
In a rare decision, the Senate adopted a resolution – moved by Leader of the House Raja Zafarul Haq on May 19 – for converting the house into a committee of the whole.
Col (retd) had moved a motion seeking discussion on government measures to provide speedy and inexpensive justice.
During a recent meeting of the committee that invited proposals for further deliberation, former law & parliamentary affairs minister SM Zafar floated the idea of appointing part-time judges to clear the backlog of cases.
“Senior advocates can, by rule, be required to serve on the bench for a period of one or two years with the same powers as the court to which they are added,” Zafar told the meeting. “Part-time judges will also take oath under the Constitution, but they will not be disabled when they return to regular practice.”
His proposal said new ideas must be adopted because the problem of delays was getting worse. He cited the example of the UK, where Queen’s or King’s Counsels are appointed to act as part-time judges. “This practice has eminently helped decrease the backlog of cases.”
Such practices can be evolved in consultation with the legal and judicial commission, Zafar’s proposal stated further.
Suo motu jurisdiction
The jurist also discussed the issues related to suo motu jurisdiction of the court and asked for amending Article 184 of the Constitution for judicial restraint.
He said: “Suo motu jurisdiction, which is the extension of public-spirited litigation, ought to be controlled by ‘judicial restraint’, as they say ‘the guardian should guard himself’.” However, he added, due to the very active role of the media, judicial restraint seems to be missing in high-profile cases.
“Records show that most of the Supreme Court’s time has been consumed by suo motu exercise of jurisdiction, which has also resulted in reducing the usefulness of high courts that have similar jurisdiction in the form of writ petition.”
Zafar also suggested that alternate dispute resolution, with the supplementary arbitration law, be made operational; revisional jurisdiction in civil and criminal procedure be abolished; inter-court appeals in high courts be omitted; independent law & justice commission and similar independent judicial academies be planned; Shariat Court, instead of being a separate entity that causes conflict of jurisdiction, be made a part of the high courts in the form of special benches.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 16th, 2015.
The upper house of parliament recently converted itself into a whole committee to consider proposals for speedy and inexpensive justice – one of which is appointing part-time judges.
In a rare decision, the Senate adopted a resolution – moved by Leader of the House Raja Zafarul Haq on May 19 – for converting the house into a committee of the whole.
Col (retd) had moved a motion seeking discussion on government measures to provide speedy and inexpensive justice.
During a recent meeting of the committee that invited proposals for further deliberation, former law & parliamentary affairs minister SM Zafar floated the idea of appointing part-time judges to clear the backlog of cases.
“Senior advocates can, by rule, be required to serve on the bench for a period of one or two years with the same powers as the court to which they are added,” Zafar told the meeting. “Part-time judges will also take oath under the Constitution, but they will not be disabled when they return to regular practice.”
His proposal said new ideas must be adopted because the problem of delays was getting worse. He cited the example of the UK, where Queen’s or King’s Counsels are appointed to act as part-time judges. “This practice has eminently helped decrease the backlog of cases.”
Such practices can be evolved in consultation with the legal and judicial commission, Zafar’s proposal stated further.
Suo motu jurisdiction
The jurist also discussed the issues related to suo motu jurisdiction of the court and asked for amending Article 184 of the Constitution for judicial restraint.
He said: “Suo motu jurisdiction, which is the extension of public-spirited litigation, ought to be controlled by ‘judicial restraint’, as they say ‘the guardian should guard himself’.” However, he added, due to the very active role of the media, judicial restraint seems to be missing in high-profile cases.
“Records show that most of the Supreme Court’s time has been consumed by suo motu exercise of jurisdiction, which has also resulted in reducing the usefulness of high courts that have similar jurisdiction in the form of writ petition.”
Zafar also suggested that alternate dispute resolution, with the supplementary arbitration law, be made operational; revisional jurisdiction in civil and criminal procedure be abolished; inter-court appeals in high courts be omitted; independent law & justice commission and similar independent judicial academies be planned; Shariat Court, instead of being a separate entity that causes conflict of jurisdiction, be made a part of the high courts in the form of special benches.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 16th, 2015.