Judges retirement age: Movers having second thoughts on bill presentation in NA

ISLAMABAD: The sponsors of a proposed private members’ constitutional bill, belonging to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), to enhance the retirement age of Supreme Court judges by three years are having a second thought to move it in the National Assembly in the face of its opposition from different circles.

“I will see when the National Assembly meets whether or not to table the bill,” one of the two sponsors, Syed Fakhar Imam, told The News when contacted. He said that for the moment he was busy as the chairman of the Kashmir Committee. The other sponsor, Amjad Ali Khan elected from Mianwali, was not available for comments. Fakhar Imam, who was one of the exceptional speakers of the National Assembly during General Ziaul Haq’s time in the eighties, said that some fellow MPs planned to bring the bill before the Lower House of Parliament.

On September 18, the National Assembly had to defer the introduction of this bill due to objections raised by the opposition. Parliamentary Secretary for Law and Justice Ms Maleeka Bokhari had not opposed it. Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader Syed Khursheed Shah had said that the government was under any pressure. It itself should introduce the bill instead of bringing it a private members’ proposal, he said adding that in the first step, the government should increase retirement age of all government employees and then initiate a similar process for the Supreme Court judges.

At the time, the PPP pointed out a lack of quorum. The House was suspended. When the proceedings resumed after for an hour, Speaker Asad Qaisar allowed introduction of the bill with a majority voice. But the opposition challenged the decision and demanded voting. Sensing the situation, the speaker deferred the bill, asking both sides to sit together to sort out the issue.

Top representatives of the lawyers’ representative bodies and senior lawyers have voiced concern over the proposed enhancement of the superannuation age of the apex court judges and said that no justification has been given. The move has stirred a debate in the legal fraternity.

Apart from the general opposition to the initiative, the ruling coalition doesn’t have the mandatory two-thirds majority in both the Senate and the National Assembly to pass the constitutional amendment. The government is not even in a position to do ordinary legislation for not having a simple majority in the Senate.

Article 179 of the Constitution deals with the retirement age of the Supreme Court justices. It says an apex court judge will hold office until he attains the age of 65 years unless he sooner resigns or is removed from office in accordance with the Constitution. The corresponding article, 195, prescribes sixty-two years as the retirement age for the high court judges.

Article 239 says a bill to amend the Constitution may originate in either the Senate or the National Assembly and, when it has been passed by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total membership, it will be transmitted to the other chamber. If it is approved without amendment by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of the House to which it is transmitted, it will be presented to the President for assent.

If the bill sails through with amendment by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of the House to which it is transmitted, it will be reconsidered by the chamber in which it had originated, and if the bill as amended by the former House is passed by the latter by the votes of not less than two-thirds of its total membership, it will be presented to the President for assent.

The provision also says a constitutional bill which would have the effect of altering the limits of a province will not be presented to the President for assent unless it has been passed by the assembly of that province by the votes of not less than two-thirds of its total membership. No constitutional amendment will be called in question in any court on any ground whatsoever. For the removal of doubt, the article declared that there is no limitation whatever on the power of the Parliament to amend any of the provisions of the Constitution.

Last month, Prime Minister Imran Khan constituted a seven—member committee to examine a proposal to increase the retirement age of civil servants. The body was directed to come up with a recommendation whether the proposal is feasible or not, and if so, suggest the way forward for its implementation—how, when and scope whether to implement across-the-board or selectively.

Its terms of reference included examination of the proposal of increasing the age of retirement keeping in view its aspects relating to legal, financial, administrative, organisational efficiency and economic, including, if any, on job creation prospects. Before this, a similar proposal was also sent to Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP). The KP government, in July, enacted a law, raising the superannuation age of civil servants from 60 years to 63 years. There is no movement forward in Punjab.