LAHORE: A lawyers’ representatives convention on Saturday resolved to challenge the newly-introduced amendments to the National Accountability Ordinance 1999 before the courts throughout the country.

The convention addressed by the leaders of different bars condemned the promulgation of the ordinance, saying it was in violation of the Constitution, against the independence of the judiciary and shocking to the democratic principles.

It said the bars throughout the country had been opposing the appointment of retired judges as judicial officers, regretting that the NAB amendment ordinance completely undermined this basic principle of independence of the judiciary.

The Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) hosted the convention with the support of all the other bar councils, high court bar associations of KP, Sindh, Balochistan and Punjab.

Demand ‘objective criteria’ for judges appointment, elevation

In a declaration, the convention also asked the Judicial Commission to frame transparent and objective criteria and guidelines for the appointment of judges at all levels, in conjunction with other stakeholders, including the bar and the parliamentary committees. It said a permanent committee should be constituted for the purpose to represent the bars view.

The convention considered that the 19th constitutional amendment, which made the parliamentary committee toothless, disrupted the balance among the stakeholders and allowed judges a free hand to make further appointments as per their will.

It resolved that references before the Supreme Judicial Council should be expeditiously pursued in chronological order as per date of filing. The high-profile cases relating to judges, the judiciary and important constitutional matters should be heard on priority and be decided expeditiously.

It called upon the Judicial Commission to strictly adhere to the seniority principle in appointments to the apex court and promotions from the district judiciary to the high courts, until the framing of the rules, to end the practice of “pick and choose”.

The convention decided to file a petition before the Supreme Court, challenging appointments made in violation of the seniority principle.

It also urged the chief justice of Pakistan and other judges of the superior court to stay away from any partisan activities of the bar and should not make themselves a party to the bar politics.

The convention considered that the “unfettered power” of the chief justices to constitute and dissolve benches and fix cases must be regulated and controlled to promote trust in the institution and the relevant rules must be amended to ensure that such power was devolved to a larger committee and followed some fixed parameters.

It regretted that the unregulated power of suo motu replaced the objectivity of the judicial process with personal agendas and desires. It called for framing of the rules to govern suo motu cases that ensured the bench taking such notice was not permitted to hear it and confer the right to appeal upon larger benches.

Published in Dawn, October 10th, 2021