Judges moved to IHC not required to take fresh oath: govt

ISLAMABAD: The federal government Wednesday informed the Supreme Court that the judges transferred to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) had already taken their oaths and there was no provision in the Constitution requiring them to take a fresh oath.

The federal government filed its concise statement with the Supreme Court in response to the identical petitions filed by six judges of the Islamabad High Court (IHC), Lahore High Court Bar Association, Lahore Bar Association and others challenging the transfer of judges from various High Courts to the Islamabad High Court (IHC).

In its concise reply submitted through Additional Attorney General Munawar Iqbal Duggal, the federal government requested the apex court to dismiss the instant petitions with the contention that once a judge had entered upon the office, transfer to another High Court did not necessitate a fresh oath. “If this position is accepted, then every time an additional judge’s term is extended, he/she would have to take a fresh oath,” the reply says, adding that a transfer takes place under Article 200 which does not equate to entering upon the office and therefore the requirement of a fresh oath cannot be countenanced.

Therefore, the concise statement contended that no fresh oath was required adding that the oath of all High Courts was identical.

It was further contended that there was no separate oath provided for the High Court in the Islamabad Capital Territory adding that the judges of Islamabad High Court took the same oath which the judges of the High Courts of the provinces took. “The transferred judges having already taken that oath cannot possibly be required to take any other oath, which even otherwise is not provided by the Constitution,” the statement added.

The federal government submitted that the power of the president to transfer a judge under Article 200(1) was very limited adding that the real power lay with the chief justice of Pakistan, two chief justices of respective High Courts and the transferee judge.

“Consent of the judge being transferred and consultation with the chief justice of Pakistan as well as of the respective High Courts are conditions precedent to the actual transfer of the judge,” the reply said. The court was further informed that the IHC must always be a representative court and its current serving judges fully reflected it.

The concise statement further contended that presently, Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir was from Balochistan, Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz from Sindh (urban) and Chief Justice Aamer Farooq from Punjab. It claimed that with the present facts of the case, the transfer of judges from Sindh, Balochistan and Punjab, being the different federating units, to the IHC was in harmony with the spirit of federalism.