Islamabad:
During the hearing in the case of transfer of the judges, a judge raised the question of whether the powers of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) can be ineffective by the permanent transfer of judges of one court superior to another through executive orders.
A bank member also asked about the basic principle and the criteria behind such transfers.
A Constitutional Bank (CB) of five members of the Supreme Court led by Judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar resumed on Tuesday a large number of requests filed against the transfer of three provincial judges of the Court superior to the Superior Court of Islamabad (IHC) in February and the subsequent changes in the list of antiques of the judges.
Resuming his argument in support of the transfer, the attorney general of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Awan said that no new appointments had been made and the transferred judges did not require a new oath. He said the Supreme Court already ruled that antiquity begins from the date of appointment.
Judge Shakeel Ahmed asked why the Secretary of Law had clarified in the summary that the transferred judges did not need a new oath. The AGP said the clarification intended to avoid ambiguity in the notification after advice approval.
He said that the then president of the Supreme Court of IHC Aamer Faooq had determined the antiquity of IHC judges.
“Judge Aamer Faooq was totally autonomous to determine seniority. The main judges and registrars of four superior courts also did not raise any objection to transfers.”
He said that Judge Farooq made the decision based on a representation presented by five IHC judges against the transfer of new changes to the court and the changes in the antiquity list. Judge Farooq had rejected the representation, which led the judges to present an appeal in the Supreme Court.
Judge Mazhar said that the advice of the petitioners had not mentioned this representation or decision of Judge Farooq during his arguments.
