Being part of rubber-stamp body useless: PTI senator

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Senator Nauman Wazir Khattak, who is a member of the parliamentary committee on appointment of judges of superior courts, says he can’t be part of a “rubber-stamp” body that has no say in the assignment it has been given. “As the PTI stands for supremacy of Parliament, merit, professionalism and anti-corruption, there is no point in sitting in this parliamentary forum that has no power whatsoever,” the senator told The News when approached to confirm reports regarding his resignation from the forum. Khattak, elected from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, said the eight-member parliamentary committee was asked to just rubber-stamp the selection of judges recommended by the judicial commission without even having a look at the antecedents and performance of the proposed nominees and the reports of different agencies about them. He said even the promotions of Grade 17 officers were not done this way and their performance was critiqued to ascertain whether or not they qualified to move to the next pay scale. He said any negative remarks about such officials were given tremendous credence while considering the cases for their upgradation.

“In the United States, the proposed judges are even interviewed by the concerned parliamentary panels,” he said and added that it was better to dispense with the present powerless body or it should be given the due powers.

The senator said that previously comprehensive details about the recommended names used to span 20/30 pages, but now they were confined to only 3/4 sheets, which the members of the parliamentary were not allowed to critically examine and scrutinise. “I had raised written objections in the earlier meetings of the parliamentary body.”

Khattak said there was no use in having the parliamentary committee in its present shape when it can’t do anything but has to approve the names sent to it by the judicial commission. He said he sent his resignation to the Senate Secretary who acts as the secretary of this committee as the PTI can’t be part of any such forum.

Article 175A inserted in the Constitution by the eighteenth amendment says the parliamentary committee on receipt of a nomination from the judicial commission may confirm the nominee by majority of its total membership within 14 days, failing which the nomination shall be deemed to have been confirmed.

However, the committee, for reasons to be recorded, may not confirm the nomination by three-fourth majority of its total membership within this period. If a nomination is not confirmed by the committee, it shall forward its decision with reasons so recorded to the judicial commission through the prime minister. If a nomination is not confirmed, the judicial commission shall send another nomination. The committee shall send the name of the nominee confirmed by it or deemed to have been confirmed to the prime minister who shall forward the same to the president for appointment.

No action or decision taken by the judicial commission or the committee shall be invalid or called in question only on the ground of the existence of a vacancy therein or of the absence of any member from any meeting thereof. The meetings of the committee shall be held in camera and the record of its proceedings shall be maintained.

The committee consists of four members from the Senate and the National Assembly each. However, when the National Assembly is dissolved, the total membership of the committee shall consist of the members from the Senate and the provisions of Article 175A shall, mutatis mutandis [the necessary changes having been made], apply.

Out of the eight members of the committee, four shall be from the treasury benches, two from each House, and four from the opposition benches, two from each House. The nomination of members from the treasury benches shall be made by the leader of the House and from the opposition benches by the leader of the opposition.

Back in 2010, a 26-member Raza Rabbani committee that had drafted the eighteenth amendment with consensus of all the parliamentary forces had empowered this parliamentary panel. However, the then Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry had rejected it and urged that the judicial commission should have the exclusive authority to pick up the judges and the parliamentary committee should not have powers to interfere in this process. Willy-nilly, this was accepted and Article 175A was incorporated.

In early 2018, a draft constitutional amendment bill prepared on the recommendation of a Farooq H Naek led Senate committee was reviewed by the federal law ministry during the tenure of the Nawaz Sharif government to give a decisive authority to parliamentary committee to appoint judges and accord an upper hand to it in the nomination of justices. But it could not be introduced in parliament then.

The bill had suggested the substitution of Article 175A. Although the bill had dealt with the judges’ appointment only, the law ministry had deliberated upon inclusion of the judges’ accountability and removal by these judicial reforms. It had provided that the decision of the parliamentary committee shall not be called into question in any court on any ground whatsoever.