close
Monday May 27, 2024

How can agencies control judges’ appointment, asks Justice Minallah

“Whether it will not affect the independence of the judiciary,” Justice Minallah asked

By Our Correspondent
May 09, 2023
Athar Minallah, a judge of the Supreme Court. APP/File
Athar Minallah, a judge of the Supreme Court. APP/File

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) Monday questioned whether the parliamentary committee can reject the recommendations of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) on the appointment of judges to the superior judiciary on the basis of intelligence reports.

A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial, heard the matter regarding the appointment of Tariq Afridi as an additional judge to the Peshawar High Court (PHC), recommended by the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP).

The court, after admitting to a regular hearing of the instant matter, issued notice to the Attorney General for legal assistance.

During the course of the hearing, counsel for the appellant, submitted before the court that the JCP had recommended the appointment of Tariq Afridi as an additional judge to the PHC.

The council, however, informed the court that the parliamentary committee on the appointment of judges did not approve the appointment of Afridi on the basis of intelligence reports. To a court query, the counsel submitted that as per intelligence reports, the reputation of Tariq Afridi was not up to mark.

Justice Athar Minanllah observed that instead of examining the professional capabilities, the parliamentary committee disapproved the appointment of the appellant on the basis of intelligence reports.

The judge questioned how intelligence agencies could control the appointment of judges to the superior judiciary. “Whether it will not affect the independence of the judiciary,” Justice Minallah asked.

CJP Bandial observed that the legal aspect of the case would be looked into and it would be examined whether the parliamentary committee could reject the recommendations of the JCP. Later, the court adjourned the matter for a month.