Daily Times

The independence of the judiciary means a lot to the people of Pakistan, which is why they stood behind the deposed judges and struggled to restore them in the hope that thereby justice would prevail. The judiciary seems to be enjoying the trust of the people, which therefore entails a huge responsibility. Responding to these expectations, the Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry has agreed with the reservations of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) and postponed the hasty nomination of the judges set to constitute a bench tasked with hearing the appeal of Prime Minister Gilani with regard to the verdict in the contempt case. The PBC on May 5 had passed a resolution against the proposal of appointment of acting or ad hoc judges to the Supreme Court (SC), especially when it could fill one seat lying vacant since many months. The choice of the proposed ad hoc judges had also raised eyebrows. In such a situation, how could justice be served has also appeared as a rather obvious question. Naturally, to strike down the practice of ad hoc preference, favouritism and nepotism, elevation of judges has to be made on the basis of the principle of seniority, as laid down by the SC itself. These ills must not be a part of the superior judiciary, which has to deal with serious and sensitive cases. In the matter of promotions, following the normal course is mandatory so that only those deserving judges assume the new responsibilities who had earned that right on the basis of seniority. As this basic principle was missing in the present setting, the legal fraternity and civil society keep questioning the unnatural conformity present among all the 17 judges of the apex court. No dissenting note has appeared by any of the SC judges so far. In the SC, all judges are equal. There is nothing binding any judge from applying his mind independently. Sticking to the proper way and basic principles is imperative for the image and working of the judiciary.

The new structure of appointments under recent constitutional amendments do empower parliament as the nominees of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) are sent to a parliamentary committee for approval. However, practically it is only token representation. Moreover, in the appointment of ad hoc judges, the JCP is not bound to get the parliamentary committee’s approval. The judiciary should not become a hermetically sealed self-perpetuating system. The best way is through the proper vetting of judges by parliament so as to ensure the appointment of independent judges. *