ISLAMABAD: The highest body of lawyers has decided to prod the eightmember bipartisan Parliamentary Committee (PC) over its silence after the recent elevation of two ad hoc judges to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court Bar Association feels that the only remedy to the committee`s diminishing role would be through amendments to the constitution. With this in mind, SCBA President Ali Zafar has sought discussions with members of the committee through a letter addressed to Naveed Qamar, the head of the PC on judges` appointment.

Mr Qamar is a member of the National Assembly from the PPP.Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has taken over the role of a final decision-maker in the appointment of judges through its 2011 Munir Hussain Bhatti case a judgment in which the top courthadheldthatPCdoesnothavethe jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Judicial Commission (JC), which recommends the appointment of judges, Mr Zafar argued in his letter.

The judgment had also held the PC`s decision was subject to a judicial review by a bench of the Supreme Court, recalled the letter. Copies of the letter have been sent to a former chairman of the Senate, Farooq H. Naek, Senators Javed Abbasi and Ilyas Ahmed Bilour, and MNAs Chaudhry Mahmood Bashir Virk and Mohammad Arshad Khan Leghari, the other members of PC.The SCBA says the judgment is contrarytotheintentionofthe Constitution since it has reduced the role of PC to a mere rubber stamp.

Speaking at a full-court reference on Dec 14 to bid farewell to Justice Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry on reaching superannuation, the SCBA president highlighted that Pakistani people deserve the best of the best, the brightest and the most fair to be appointed to the post of the judge and this was only possible if the method of appointment of judges was open, transparent and based on merit. This in turn is the only way that the people will truly have faith and trust in the courts and the legal system, Mr Zafar said.

Now Mr Zafar emphasised in his letter that all state institutions should beempowered and independent and parIlament being supreme should play its role by carrying out necessary amendments in the Constitution ensuring that PC has a more effective role in the appointment of judges as originally envisaged.

Accordingly, the SCBA has prepared a set of draft amendments which, the letter contended, will reflect the true intention ofthelegislature andensure a more transparent, fair and robust process for the appointment of judges. This will also fulfil the aim of appointing persons to the judiciary who are most talented, fair-minded and independent.

Referring to the silence of PC in the aftermath of Munir Bhatti judgment, Mr Zafar regretted that the decision has created a void since the committee hadleft everything to JC to determine who to be appointed judges.

Instead of abdicating its constitutional role, Mr Zafar suggested, PC should require parliament to make necessary constitutional amendments suggested by SCBA that would help the committee play an effective and positive role in the appointment of judges.

The letter has reserved some flal< over the appointment of Justices Tariq Pervez and Khilji Arif in the Supreme Court and said that Article 182 of the Constitution that allows such appointments, militates against the independence of the judiciary and also goes against the 1996 Al-Jehad Trust case which asked for elimination of ad hocism in the judiciary in all circumstances.

The SCBA believes that Article 182 should be deleted from the Constitution, adding that if the issue of backlog and delay of the cases had to be addressed, then better solution was increasing the strength of the judges from current 17 to 19 or 21 by a simple amendment of ordinary law that will not even require a constitutional amendment.

The letter suggested improvements in the exercise of suo motu jurisdiction by stating that action under Article 184(3) of the Constitution can be taken after it was recommended by any bench of the Supreme Court but should only be initiated on an order by the chief justice after consultation with senior puisne judge. This will ensure transparency in the initiation of the suo motu cases, the letter said.

Moreover an appeal against the decision made under Article 184(3) should be provided to another bench of the apex court. Such an appeal is the requirement of fair trial as contained in Article 10A of the Constitution, the letter emphasised. ISLAMABAD: The highest body of lawyers has decided to prod the eightmember bipartisan Parliamentary Committee (PC) over its silence after the recent elevation of two ad hoc judges to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court Bar Association feels that the only remedy to the committee`s diminishing role would be through amendments to the constitution. With this in mind, SCBA President Ali Zafar has sought discussions with members of the committee through a letter addressed to Naveed Qamar, the head of the PC on judges` appointment.

Mr Qamar is a member of the National Assembly from the PPP.Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has taken over the role of a final decision-maker in the appointment of judges through its 2011 Munir Hussain Bhatti case a judgment in which the top courthadheldthatPCdoesnothavethe jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Judicial Commission (JC), which recommends the appointment of judges, Mr Zafar argued in his letter.

The judgment had also held the PC`s decision was subject to a judicial review by a bench of the Supreme Court, recalled the letter. Copies of the letter have been sent to a former chairman of the Senate, Farooq H. Naek, Senators Javed Abbasi and Ilyas Ahmed Bilour, and MNAs Chaudhry Mahmood Bashir Virk and Mohammad Arshad Khan Leghari, the other members of PC.The SCBA says the judgment is contrarytotheintentionofthe Constitution since it has reduced the role of PC to a mere rubber stamp.

Speaking at a full-court reference on Dec 14 to bid farewell to Justice Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry on reaching superannuation, the SCBA president highlighted that Pakistani people deserve the best of the best, the brightest and the most fair to be appointed to the post of the judge and this was only possible if the method of appointment of judges was open, transparent and based on merit. This in turn is the only way that the people will truly have faith and trust in the courts and the legal system, Mr Zafar said.

Now Mr Zafar emphasised in his letter that all state institutions should beempowered and independent and parIlament being supreme should play its role by carrying out necessary amendments in the Constitution ensuring that PC has a more effective role in the appointment of judges as originally envisaged.

Accordingly, the SCBA has prepared a set of draft amendments which, the letter contended, will reflect the true intention ofthelegislature andensure a more transparent, fair and robust process for the appointment of judges. This will also fulfil the aim of appointing persons to the judiciary who are most talented, fair-minded and independent.

Referring to the silence of PC in the aftermath of Munir Bhatti judgment, Mr Zafar regretted that the decision has created a void since the committee hadleft everything to JC to determine who to be appointed judges.

Instead of abdicating its constitutional role, Mr Zafar suggested, PC should require parliament to make necessary constitutional amendments suggested by SCBA that would help the committee play an effective and positive role in the appointment of judges.

The letter has reserved some flal< over the appointment of Justices Tariq Pervez and Khilji Arif in the Supreme Court and said that Article 182 of the Constitution that allows such appointments, militates against the independence of the judiciary and also goes against the 1996 Al-Jehad Trust case which asked for elimination of ad hocism in the judiciary in all circumstances.

The SCBA believes that Article 182 should be deleted from the Constitution, adding that if the issue of backlog and delay of the cases had to be addressed, then better solution was increasing the strength of the judges from current 17 to 19 or 21 by a simple amendment of ordinary law that will not even require a constitutional amendment.

The letter suggested improvements in the exercise of suo motu jurisdiction by stating that action under Article 184(3) of the Constitution can be taken after it was recommended by any bench of the Supreme Court but should only be initiated on an order by the chief justice after consultation with senior puisne judge. This will ensure transparency in the initiation of the suo motu cases, the letter said.

Moreover an appeal against the decision made under Article 184(3) should be provided to another bench of the apex court. Such an appeal is the requirement of fair trial as contained in Article 10A of the Constitution, the letter emphasised. ISLAMABAD: The highest body of lawyers has decided to prod the eightmember bipartisan Parliamentary Committee (PC) over its silence after the recent elevation of two ad hoc judges to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court Bar Association feels that the only remedy to the committee`s diminishing role would be through amendments to the constitution. With this in mind, SCBA President Ali Zafar has sought discussions with members of the committee through a letter addressed to Naveed Qamar, the head of the PC on judges` appointment.

Mr Qamar is a member of the National Assembly from the PPP.Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has taken over the role of a final decision-maker in the appointment of judges through its 2011 Munir Hussain Bhatti case a judgment in which the top courthadheldthatPCdoesnothavethe jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Judicial Commission (JC), which recommends the appointment of judges, Mr Zafar argued in his letter.

The judgment had also held the PC`s decision was subject to a judicial review by a bench of the Supreme Court, recalled the letter. Copies of the letter have been sent to a former chairman of the Senate, Farooq H. Naek, Senators Javed Abbasi and Ilyas Ahmed Bilour, and MNAs Chaudhry Mahmood Bashir Virk and Mohammad Arshad Khan Leghari, the other members of PC.The SCBA says the judgment is contrarytotheintentionofthe Constitution since it has reduced the role of PC to a mere rubber stamp.

Speaking at a full-court reference on Dec 14 to bid farewell to Justice Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry on reaching superannuation, the SCBA president highlighted that Pakistani people deserve the best of the best, the brightest and the most fair to be appointed to the post of the judge and this was only possible if the method of appointment of judges was open, transparent and based on merit. This in turn is the only way that the people will truly have faith and trust in the courts and the legal system, Mr Zafar said.

Now Mr Zafar emphasised in his letter that all state institutions should beempowered and independent and parIlament being supreme should play its role by carrying out necessary amendments in the Constitution ensuring that PC has a more effective role in the appointment of judges as originally envisaged.

Accordingly, the SCBA has prepared a set of draft amendments which, the letter contended, will reflect the true intention ofthelegislature andensure a more transparent, fair and robust process for the appointment of judges. This will also fulfil the aim of appointing persons to the judiciary who are most talented, fair-minded and independent.

Referring to the silence of PC in the aftermath of Munir Bhatti judgment, Mr Zafar regretted that the decision has created a void since the committee hadleft everything to JC to determine who to be appointed judges.

Instead of abdicating its constitutional role, Mr Zafar suggested, PC should require parliament to make necessary constitutional amendments suggested by SCBA that would help the committee play an effective and positive role in the appointment of judges.

The letter has reserved some flal< over the appointment of Justices Tariq Pervez and Khilji Arif in the Supreme Court and said that Article 182 of the Constitution that allows such appointments, militates against the independence of the judiciary and also goes against the 1996 Al-Jehad Trust case which asked for elimination of ad hocism in the judiciary in all circumstances.

The SCBA believes that Article 182 should be deleted from the Constitution, adding that if the issue of backlog and delay of the cases had to be addressed, then better solution was increasing the strength of the judges from current 17 to 19 or 21 by a simple amendment of ordinary law that will not even require a constitutional amendment.

The letter suggested improvements in the exercise of suo motu jurisdiction by stating that action under Article 184(3) of the Constitution can be taken after it was recommended by any bench of the Supreme Court but should only be initiated on an order by the chief justice after consultation with senior puisne judge. This will ensure transparency in the initiation of the suo motu cases, the letter said.

Moreover an appeal against the decision made under Article 184(3) should be provided to another bench of the apex court. Such an appeal is the requirement of fair trial as contained in Article 10A of the Constitution, the letter emphasised. ISLAMABAD: The highest body of lawyers has decided to prod the eightmember bipartisan Parliamentary Committee (PC) over its silence after the recent elevation of two ad hoc judges to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court Bar Association feels that the only remedy to the committee`s diminishing role would be through amendments to the constitution. With this in mind, SCBA President Ali Zafar has sought discussions with members of the committee through a letter addressed to Naveed Qamar, the head of the PC on judges` appointment.

Mr Qamar is a member of the National Assembly from the PPP.Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has taken over the role of a final decision-maker in the appointment of judges through its 2011 Munir Hussain Bhatti case a judgment in which the top courthadheldthatPCdoesnothavethe jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Judicial Commission (JC), which recommends the appointment of judges, Mr Zafar argued in his letter.

The judgment had also held the PC`s decision was subject to a judicial review by a bench of the Supreme Court, recalled the letter. Copies of the letter have been sent to a former chairman of the Senate, Farooq H. Naek, Senators Javed Abbasi and Ilyas Ahmed Bilour, and MNAs Chaudhry Mahmood Bashir Virk and Mohammad Arshad Khan Leghari, the other members of PC.The SCBA says the judgment is contrarytotheintentionofthe Constitution since it has reduced the role of PC to a mere rubber stamp.

Speaking at a full-court reference on Dec 14 to bid farewell to Justice Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry on reaching superannuation, the SCBA president highlighted that Pakistani people deserve the best of the best, the brightest and the most fair to be appointed to the post of the judge and this was only possible if the method of appointment of judges was open, transparent and based on merit. This in turn is the only way that the people will truly have faith and trust in the courts and the legal system, Mr Zafar said.

Now Mr Zafar emphasised in his letter that all state institutions should beempowered and independent and parIlament being supreme should play its role by carrying out necessary amendments in the Constitution ensuring that PC has a more effective role in the appointment of judges as originally envisaged.

Accordingly, the SCBA has prepared a set of draft amendments which, the letter contended, will reflect the true intention ofthelegislature andensure a more transparent, fair and robust process for the appointment of judges. This will also fulfil the aim of appointing persons to the judiciary who are most talented, fair-minded and independent.

Referring to the silence of PC in the aftermath of Munir Bhatti judgment, Mr Zafar regretted that the decision has created a void since the committee hadleft everything to JC to determine who to be appointed judges.

Instead of abdicating its constitutional role, Mr Zafar suggested, PC should require parliament to make necessary constitutional amendments suggested by SCBA that would help the committee play an effective and positive role in the appointment of judges.

The letter has reserved some flal< over the appointment of Justices Tariq Pervez and Khilji Arif in the Supreme Court and said that Article 182 of the Constitution that allows such appointments, militates against the independence of the judiciary and also goes against the 1996 Al-Jehad Trust case which asked for elimination of ad hocism in the judiciary in all circumstances.

The SCBA believes that Article 182 should be deleted from the Constitution, adding that if the issue of backlog and delay of the cases had to be addressed, then better solution was increasing the strength of the judges from current 17 to 19 or 21 by a simple amendment of ordinary law that will not even require a constitutional amendment.

The letter suggested improvements in the exercise of suo motu jurisdiction by stating that action under Article 184(3) of the Constitution can be taken after it was recommended by any bench of the Supreme Court but should only be initiated on an order by the chief justice after consultation with senior puisne judge. This will ensure transparency in the initiation of the suo motu cases, the letter said.

Moreover an appeal against the decision made under Article 184(3) should be provided to another bench of the apex court. Such an appeal is the requirement of fair trial as contained in Article 10A of the Constitution, the letter emphasised.