Sir: In its recent report, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has criticised the Supreme Court (SC) of Pakistan for its “excessive activism”. The report has pointed out three areas that it considers are not the domain of the courts. One is the selection of judges — the ICJ believes it to be the prerogative of government. Two, it believes that the SC is meddling in the affairs of parliament, thus putting a spanner in the work of the house. Three, the SC is accused of going slow in settling cases. As per the international practice, appointment of judges is the prerogative of the political administration; the court has nothing to do in this regard. In Pakistan, it is the other way around. The courts have exerted their right forcefully in the appointment of judges. The argument that a judge appointed by the government would talk the language of the latter or would become politicised holds no water. The recent order of the Punjab government giving powers to the High Court instead of PPSC (public service commission) to recruit lower court judiciary does not conform with international norms. There is no such precedent in the civilised world. The Indian courts took two suo motu notices in 2011. Both were of a constitutional nature, while in Pakistan 680 suo motu notices were taken in the same year. The ICJ has lamented that even high courts in Pakistan have been issuing suo motu notices, when they were not constitutionally authorised. One may agree with the ICJ report, which ends with a question mark asking if separation of powers is dead in Pakistan. DR AZHAR MUKHTAR SINDHU Shorkot