KARACHI: A regular division bench of the Sindh High Court (SHC) on Friday sought arguments on its jurisdiction to hear a petition regarding the appointment of additional judges to the court.

Led by Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar, the bench sought arguments from the concerned counsel to satisfy the court that the regular bench could hear the petition, seeking the notification issued on Dec 11 by the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) for the appointment of judges to the SHC to be declared “unconstitutional” and direct only members of the judiciary in the JCP could propose nomination for the appointment of judges of the superior courts.

After pronouncing the short order, the court adjourned the hearing till the next date.

The petition was filed by two lawyers, Jamshed Qazi and Syed Muhammad Ali Jafri, through their counsels before the regular bench of the SHC.

One of the counsels for the petitioners, Ebrahim Saifuddin, submitted that on Dec 11, the JCP issued a notification to all its members, listing the details of nominations for the appointment of additional judges in the SHC, which are to be considered on Saturday (today).

He argued that the notification demonstrated an executive overreach, effectively usurping the role of the chief justice of the high court. He also contended that after the 26th Amendment to the Constitution, the JCP was no longer predominantly comprised of members from the judiciary. Instead, he claimed, it had allegedly become an executive-dominated body.

“It is clear as day that Executives, being in majority, can simply vote in favour of their nominees and have them appointed as judges of a high court irrespective of any objection by the members from the judiciary in the JCP,” the petition stated.

The petition claimed that if the executive was given the authority to propose a list of judges for the superior court, then “there is fear that such nominees shall be proposed who are close to the executive, have good relations and cooperative with them”.

The counsel submitted that to protect the public trust and confidence, the nominations must be forwarded to the JCP by the members from the judiciary who were part of the judicial commission.

The petitioners prayed before the court to declare the list of nominee at serial No II, VI and VII in the notification as “ultra vires, unconstitutional and contrary to the principles of judicial independence and separation of powers”.

They added that to declare that “only members of the judiciary in the JCP can nominate the names and propose” for the appointment of judges of the superior courts.

To appoint the high court judges before the 26th Amendment, the JCP comprised of eight members from the judiciary, three from the executive and two from the legal fraternity.

Published in Dawn, December 21st, 2024