What's new

Names of judges suggested by CJP rejected

muhammadhafeezmalik

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
5,417
Reaction score
-17
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan

Names of judges suggested by CJP rejected​

The Judicial Commission of Pakistan rejected Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial’s nominated judges of high courts for their appointment to the Supreme Court​


The Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) Thursday rejected Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial’s nominated judges of high courts for their appointment to the Supreme Court, sources said.

CJP Bandial presided over the judicial commission’s session, where the names of total five judges, two from the Sindh High Court (SHC) and three from the Lahore High Court (LHC), were considered.

1659077861595.png


The chief justice, Justice Aijazul Ahsan, and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah voted in favour of the nominees, while Justice (retd) Sarmad Jalal Usmani voted in favour of three judges from the LHC and voted against the SHC nominees, sources said.

However, according to sources, their votes were less in number as Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Tariq Masood, Attorney-General Ashtar Ausaf Ali, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar and Bar Council representative voted against all the five nominees.



Related Stories​



After the meeting, the official statement issued about the meeting said that the JCP chairman, after detailed discussion, proposed to “defer the meeting in order to enable the Chief Justice of Pakistan to place additional information and data about those already proposed and if he considers appropriate, add more names to the list of proposees for consideration by the JCP.

“The proposal to defer the meeting was supported by Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Justice (retd) Sarmad Jalal Usmany and the Attorney General for Pakistan. It was accordingly decided to defer the meeting. The date of the next meeting will be communicated to the members of the Judicial Commission by the Chairman, JCP,” said the statement.

The statement also said that the meeting was attended by seven members of the JCP in person while Justice Qazi Faez Isa and the attorney general attended via Zoom.

Upon receiving five votes against the nominees, the chief justice ended the session without reaching a decision, sources added. Justice Qazi Faez Isa and the attorney general for Pakistan attended the meeting via video-link.

Had they been approved, then in line with Article 175-A of the Constitution of Pakistan, the JCP would have forwarded the list to the parliamentary committees for the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court.

The names of Chief Justice Peshawar High Court (PHC) Qaiser Rashid Khan, Sindh High Court (SHC) judges Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto and Justice Shahid Waheed of Lahore High Court (LHC) were considered to fill the existing vacancies.

The positions of SC judges fell vacant after the retirement of Justice Mushir Alam, former chief justice Gulzar Ahmed, Justice Maqbool Baqar and Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah will reach superannuation next August.

After the meeting, Justice Qazi Faez Isa stressed that Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s decisions made on appointment of judges should be released for public.

In a letter written to the JCP members and Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, who is also the chairman of the body, Justice Isa said that the JCP meeting was supposed to consider the five nominations, made by the chief justice, on Thursday. “After a detailed discussion, the majority of the honourable members of the JCP, that is Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar, Attorney-General Ashtar Ausaf Ali, representative of the Pakistan Bar Council Akhtar Hussain, and myself, decided to reject the nominations of the three junior judges of the Sindh High Court and one junior judge of the Lahore High Court,” said Justice Isa.

about the elevation of chief justice of the Peshawar High Court to the apex court, Justice Isa said that the body decided that as he was not the senior-most judge “his name may be considered when placed alongside those of his peers, that is, with the Chief Justices of the other High Courts and senior-most judges, with the provision of comparable data”.

“It was also decided that the Constitution did not permit appointments to ‘anticipated’ vacancies,” said Justice Isa. However, the judge shared that Justice Bandial “did not dictate the decisions that were taken, and left the meeting quite abruptly, followed by Justice Ijazul Ahsan”.

He added that after the chairman’s departure, it was left to the temporarily appointed acting secretary to draw up the minutes of the decisions that were taken, adding that this was his first time doing so.

“The eyes of the nation are transfixed on the JCP and they have a constitutional right to know what was decided. Therefore, the acting secretary should immediately release this decision to the media, which will also stem unnecessary speculation and misreporting as the meeting was held behind closed doors. It is expected that the detailed minutes will accurately reflect all that transpired,” said Justice Isa.

Later on, talking to Shahzeb Khanzada on Geo News, senior law expert Hamid Khan said that it is regrettable that diverse claims came out regarding the Judicial Commission meeting. It is unbelievable that Chief Justice of Pakistan as chairman of the Judicial Commission would make such a statement which has not been discussed in the meeting.

He said that according to his information, the nominees of the CJP had been rejected with majority of 5-4. He said it seems that a new statement of the JCP meeting was being issued after making certain changes. He said that it was regrettable as it is vital to uphold the sanctity of the institution. He said what has happened in the JCP meeting should be reflected in press release. If the meeting was to be deferred, it should be done before voting and after voting, it could not be considered as deferred. He said that the names presented in the meeting would have been given afresh. He said the next JCP meeting should be held after the vacation. He said that taking along the judiciary is CJP’s responsibility and it seems that the CJP is dividing the judiciary and it will undermine the dignity and independence of the institution.

He appealed to the CJP not to let create further fissures in the judiciary and he should not mete out injustice to anyone and follow the rules of justice and fairness.

He said that Sindh High Court chief justice has been waiting for elevation to the Supreme Court for the last five years. He has not been elevated to the apex court. In the same way, Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Athar Minallah has also not been made an SC judge for the last four years. He expressed hope that the CJP would take all the judges along in future.

Hamid Khan favoured amendments to the SC rules and maintained that authority to form benches should not rest with the CJP alone. He said that there should be a committee of four judges, along with the CJP, to constitute benches and constitutional and political matters should be taken up by a bench of senior most five judges. He said that the SCBA had been demanding for the last 25 years that the benches should not be formed on pick-and-choose basis.

He said that CJP Umar Ata Bandial wanted to make decisions by sitting with like-minded judges and the situation was enough to make a compromise on the independence and dignity of judiciary.

Meanwhile, SCBA President Ahsan Bhoon said he had a discussion with minister for law and representative of the bar and they endorsed the letter written by Justice Qazi Faez Isa. He said that the government and bar representatives favoured the demand of the lawyer organisations and they deserve tribute for this.


PTI plan to keep like minded, pro-PTI judges thwarted.
 
.
Matters of such importance cannot be undertaken via Zoom meetings. This callous lethargic attitude has become a legacy of judicial system employed by the state.

A functional democracy is only achievable through a functional judicial system anchored in democratically conceived lawmaking.

Not one of the institutional arm of the state has relinquished her colonial legacy which translates as utter defeat of democracy and democratic principles in the country.
 
.
PTI plan to keep like minded, pro-PTI judges thwarted.
what was that judge called, justice qayoom was it? the one who received phone call from nikka mian to give favorable desired order.

that is what phand dhari movement wants judges that give verdict on their phone calls.

will this work? NO. but no harm in trying another one of your chawal plans.

why not make lohar court the new supreme Court? lohar Court is amritsari friendly.
 
.
PTI plan to keep like minded, pro-PTI judges thwarted
I like it when PMLN and patwaris try to put things on PTI which they themselves do

PMLN and sharif family is the most Ladli party of pak army but then they try to put it on PTI

PMLN always have their people in system from military to judiciary but now they are putting this on PTI too

Same judges had given verdict against PTI but PMLN is trying hard to portray these judges are pro PTI

This List is long
 
.
I like it when PMLN and patwaris try to put things on PTI which they themselves do

PMLN and sharif family is the most Ladli party of pak army but then they try to put it on PTI

PMLN always have their people in system from military to judiciary but now they are putting this on PTI too

Same judges had given verdict against PTI but PMLN is trying hard to portray these judges are pro PTI

This List is long

These are same judges:


what was that judge called, justice qayoom was it? the one who received phone call from nikka mian to give favorable desired order.

that is what phand dhari movement wants judges that give verdict on their phone calls.

will this work? NO. but no harm in trying another one of your chawal plans.

why not make lohar court the new supreme Court? lohar Court is amritsari friendly.

Justice Khosa went one step further, requested Imran Khan to bring a petition against Nawaz Sharif. Imran Khan was absconder at that time but used to sit in front of Justice Khosa.

 
.
Matters of such importance cannot be undertaken via Zoom meetings. This callous lethargic attitude has become a legacy of judicial system employed by the state.

A functional democracy is only achievable through a functional judicial system anchored in democratically conceived lawmaking.

Not one of the institutional arm of the state has relinquished her colonial legacy which translates as utter defeat of democracy and democratic principles in the country.

JDC meeting was not being called since 18 months because father of Sahar Bandial knew that he would not be able to bring desirable junior judges, as soon as two members of JDC, AG and Justice QFI, went out of country he called a meeting of JDC. How sweet?? Zoom meeting is now a common practice in our judiciary.
 
. . .
.
Good job. Seniority principle must be upheld, CJP should not be allowed to pack the court with junior judges of his personal liking, and to push them through before Justice Sajjad Ali Shah retires. Stop passing over senior judges, SC appointment process needs better rules and oversight.
 
. .

Justice Isa demands public release of JCP's decision on judges' appointments​

Justice Qazi Faez Isa took oath as a Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan on September 5, 2014. — Photo courtesy Supreme Court of Pakistan
Justice Qazi Faez Isa took oath as a Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan on September 5, 2014. — Photo courtesy Supreme Court of Pakistan

  • Justice Isa says CJP Bandial did not dictate decisions that were taken by JCP and left meeting abruptly.
  • Eyes of nation are transfixed on the JCP as people have constititional right to know what was decided, he says.
  • Says publicly released minutes of meeting will stem unnecessary speculation and misreporting about decisions.
ISLAMABAD: Justice Qazi Faez Isa on Thursday stressed that Judicial Commission of Pakistan's (JCP) decisions made on appointment of judges be released publicly.
In a letter written to the JCP members and Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, who is also the chairman of the body, Justice Isa said that the JCP met today to consider the five nominees recommended by the chief justice.
“After a detailed discussion the majority of the honourable members of the JCP, that is the honourable Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, honourable Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar, honourable Attorney-General Ashtar Ausaf Ali, representative of the Pakistan Bar Council the honourable Akhtar Hussain and myself decided to reject the nominations of the three junior judges of the Sindh High Court and one junior judge of the Lahore High Court,” said Justice Isa.

Related items​


On the elevation of chief justice of the Peshawar High Court to the apex court, Justice Isa said that the body decided that as he was not the senior-most judge “his name may be considered when placed alongside those of his peers, that is, with the Chief Justices of the other High Courts and senior-most judges, with the provision of comparable data”.
“It was also decided that the Constitution did not permit appointments to 'anticipated' vacancies,” said Justice Isa.
However, the judge shared that Justice Bandial “did not dictate the decisions that were taken, and left the meeting quite abruptly, followed by Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan”.
He added that after the chairman’s departure, it was left to the temporarily appointed acting secretary to draw up the minutes of the decisions that were taken, adding that this was his first time doing so.
“The eyes of the nation are transfixed on the JCP and they have a constitutional right to know what was decided. Therefore, the acting secretary should immediately release this decision to the media, which will also stem unnecessary speculation and misreporting as the meeting was held behind closed doors. It is expected that the detailed minutes will accurately reflect all that transpired,” said Justice Isa.

JCP rejects CJP Bandial's nominees​

Earlier today, sources had told Geo News that JCP has rejected Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial's nominated judges of higher courts for their appointment to the Supreme Court.
Sources said that the chief justice, Justice Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah voted in favour of the nominees, while Justice (retd) Sarmad Jalal Usmani voted in favour of three judges from LHC and voted against the SHC nominees, sources said.
However, according to sources, their votes were less as Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Tariq Masood, Attorney-General Ashtar Ausaf Ali, and Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar voted against all the five nominees.

Official statement mentions no vote held​

On the other hand, the official statement issued of the meeting said that the JCP chairman, after detailed discussion, proposed to “defer the meeting in order to enable the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Pakistan to place additional information and data about those already proposed and if he considers appropriate, add more names to the list of proposees for consideration by the JCP”.
“The proposal to defer the meeting was supported by Mr Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan, Mr Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Mr Justice (Retd) Sarmad Jalal Osmany and the Attorney General for Pakistan. It was accordingly decided to defer the meeting. The date of the next meeting will be communicated to the Members of the Judicial Commission by the Chairman, JCP,” said the statement.
The statement also said that the meeting was attended by seven Members of the JCP in person while Justice Qazi Faez Isa and the attorney general attended via Zoom.
 
.
According to the CJ there was no such summery presented by me , it was just an ordinary meeting , rest is all propaganda by patwari news channels and anchors
 
.
Loooool. Seniority is no principle. Merit is principle.
You should look up these subjects properly and pause to think for a moment before making these reactionary statements. I’ve advised you this in the past.

At present the appointment of judges is far too discretionary. Forget the politics for a second, the last six appointments have been made with passing over senior judges. In Sindh, three times now the three most senior have been passed up. And the CJP has just tried to appoint 4th, 6th and 7th ranking judges.

Provincial Bar associations, SCBA and PBC have all called this out. Even if seniority is not an absolute guidance, it should not be ignored. Other considerations such as merit are subjective and hard to measure, but even here CJs have historically practised discretion.

Several resolutions have been adopted by the Bar asking legislators to work on codifying and writing into law a proper mode of deciding who should be appointed, whether that’s merit, seniority, it needs to be defined.
 
.
You should look up these subjects properly and pause to think for a moment before making these reactionary statements. I’ve advised you this in the past.

At present the appointment of judges is far too discretionary. Forget the politics for a second, the last six appointments have been made with passing over senior judges. In Sindh, three times now the three most senior have been passed up. And the CJP has just tried to appoint 4th, 6th and 7th ranking judges.

Provincial Bar associations, SCBA and PBC have all called this out. Even if seniority is not an absolute guidance, it should not be ignored. Other considerations such as merit are subjective and hard to measure, but even here CJs have historically practised discretion.

Several resolutions have been adopted by the Bar asking legislators to work on codifying and writing into law a proper mode of deciding who should be appointed, whether that’s merit, seniority, it needs to be defined.
Again. Seniority is no merit. Judicial council can come to an agreement about merit of appointing judges to SC, but calling seniority a principle of merit is absurd.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom