Islamabad:
The Judge of the Supreme Court, Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, has urged the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) to share the minutes of all its meetings during the possession of the President of the Supreme Court of Pakistan Yahya Afridi.
In a letter written on June 25, JCP’s secretary, Judge Shah raised concern for not sharing the minutes of JCP meetings to the public.
“I propose a issue of institutional concern: the interruption of the commission of the practice of freeing the minutes of their meetings to the public,” says the letter.
Judge Shah believes that the Judiciary, as a set of tendency for other state institutions, must be maintained at the highest standards of opening and public responsibility.
“The appointment of judges is a public act with long -range consequences. Pakistan people have the right to know how the judges of the country’s superior court are selected, what deliberations take place and if the constitutional standards apply in good faith.
“The opacity that now surrounds the operation of the commission is not healthy, not democratic, and is not consistent with the image of the Supreme Court as the guardian of constitutional values,” says the letter.
He; Therefore, it urges the commission that the minutes of all JCP meetings held during the current president’s mandate (CJP Aphridi) are released to the public, according to the past practice.
Abdul Moiz Jaferii lawyer said that the central premise of the newly instituted processes related to the Judiciary was that the method and the process of judicial appointments became more transparent.
A basic characteristic of this transparency was the release of minutes that allow people to see the determination process. This has now ceased. Without reason, he adds.
After the approval of the 26th constitutional amendment, the Executive has domain in the process of appointing judges, as well as the selection of judges for constitutional banks.
There is no explanation because the higher judges were not nominated for constitutional banks in the Supreme Court, as well as in the Sindh Superior Court.
There is no explanation of why the Commission is being marginalized by the Commission.
Recently, the JCP ignored the appointment of most older judges for appointment as main judges of the Superior Court.
A lawyer says they were ignored because they were not judges of related ideas of the government.
Similarly, with a valid reason, some high -ranking judges, especially the judge of the Superior Court of Peshawar, Ejaz Anwar, were not nominated for the appointment of SC Judge.
There is no explanation how the JCP altered his opinion on a judge whose integrity was in question a year ago.
It is also presented that most lawyers backed by the government are appointed judges of the higher courts during the CJP Afridi mandate.
The lawyers whose integrity and competence are out of doubt were not nominated for appointments, since they were not the related government ideas’
The CJP Aphridi so far could not evolve a strategy to minimize the influence of the Executive in the appointment of judges.
Around 50 judges are appointed in the upper courts, as well as in the Supreme Court after the approval of the 26th constitutional amendment.
During the mandate of the former CJP Qazi Faez Isa, the minutes of the Committee that works under the Law on Practice and Procedure of the Supreme Court was being shared on the website of the Supreme Court. However, this practice has been suspended during former CJP Yahya Afridi Tenure.
