Low Graphics Site

January 29, 2002 Tuesday Ziqa’ad 14, 1422 Judges’ appointment overdue The sick health sector Misuse of loudspeaker The imposing Wazir Khan mosque Adding insult to injury Judges’ appointment overdue THE alleged indifference on the part of the federal government towards the long due appointment of judges in the Azad Jammu and Kashmir High Court is worrying for the people of the state, as it is multiplying their problems. Simultaneously, it provides an opportunity to many to question the federal government’s interest in the pending affairs of Azad Kashmir. Appointment in the Supreme Court and the High Court of Azad Kashmir is a matter within the competence of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council. Practically it is in the competence of the federal government because the chief executive of Pakistan is the chairman and the federal minister for Kashmir and Northern Areas affairs is minister-in-charge of the AJK Council. According to the AJK interim constitution, the appointment of a judge in the Supreme Court is made by the AJK president on the advice of the (chairman) of the AJK Council and after consultation with the chief justice of Azad Kashmir. And if a judge is to be appointed in the High Court, the HC chief justice is also consulted. As a matter of practice, the AJK president sends a panel of some names, after consultation with the two chief justices, to the AJK Council chairman for his advice for appointment against vacant post(s). After the advice from Islamabad is received in Muzaffarabad, the president directs it to the law department for issuance of the appointment notification. In October 2000, the post of a judge fell vacant in the High Court following the retirement of Justice Mohammad Siddique Farooqi. The then AJK president, Sardar Mohammad Ibrahim Khan, reportedly sent a panel to the Council chairman within a month for his advice for appointment against the vacant post. It was believed that the chairman would recommend a name from that panel at the earliest so that the post could be filled for the convenience of the public. But that did not happen for reasons best known to the Council secretariat, until another post became vacant in the High Court on May 4, 2001, with the elevation of the then CJ, Justice Khwaja Mohammad Saeed, to the Supreme Court. Eight months have elapsed since then, there is no progress regarding the much-needed appointments in the HC. Here, it would be appropriate to mention that there was more or less a similar occurrence in the Supreme Court. Perhaps this may help the readers to know how much “importance” the AJK Council — for all practical purposes the federal government — attaches to the AJK affairs. On Nov 28, 2000, Justice Basharat Ahmed Sheikh of the Supreme Court retired. The interim constitution of Azad Kashmir says: “There shall be a Supreme Court comprising a chief justice and two judges.” In view of this constitutional provision, the successor of Mr Sheikh should have been nominated much earlier and taken the oath on the very day of his retirement (Nov 28). But the constitution was overlooked, rather violated. The AJK Supreme Court remained incomplete until the elevation of Justice Saeed, because during that period there was only one judge in the apex court other than the CJ. One finds it difficult to reject the viewpoint that the Supreme Court did not exist in Azad Kashmir from Nov 28 to May 4. Anyhow, let’s go back to the High Court affair. According to powers vested by the constitution, the AJK legislative assembly under Courts and Laws Code has provided that there shall be a chief justice and three or more judges in the High Court. But, currently there are only three judges in the HC — Chief Justice Syed Manzoor Hussain Gillani, Justice Chaudhry Mohammad Taj and Justice Reaz Akhtar Chaudhry. Being human beings the judges can also fall ill or have personal engagements that require them to go on leave. For example, Justice Taj has recently obtained leave for performance of Haj, leaving behind only two judges to perform the functions. The absence of Justice Taj has resulted in dissolution of a bench hearing appeals against the Ehtesab Court decisions. The AJK Ehtesab Act puts a time bar whereby the High Court is bound to dispose of appeals within 30 days. The Ehtesab Court in Mirpur has announced judgments in several cases in recent days. The appeals against these decisions are to be heard by the High Court, where one judge has obtained leave and the other has declined to sit on the bench owing to personal reasons. In this situation, the hearings could not be held and those convicted by the Ehtesab Court would have to remain behind the bar for failure of the executive to complete the court. Apart from such appeals, there are hundreds of pending criminal and civil cases, and it goes without saying that unless the new judges are appointed these will remain unheard and unattended. As they say, justice delayed is justice denied. If I am not mistaken Sir Winston Churchill had said during the World War II that if the courts in the United Kingdom were dispensing justice, Britain would not lose the war. Are we not creating a situation where dispensation of justice is gradually being made impossible and that too when we too face the threat of a war from across the Line of Control? How can the courts dispense justice if they are understaffed? Of late, rumours have been rife that the federal government is contemplating reducing the size of the superior judiciary in Azad Kashmir. One wonders whether the delay in appointment of the judges in the High Court has something to do with this alleged contemplation. Governments often profess they want to deliver good governance to the masses. One can only suggest that they should practise what they preach. The institutions should be strengthened and in this regard whosoever is in power should set examples. Incomplete judiciary in Azad Kashmir is only adding to the miseries of the people of the state who move to the court for urgent redress and remedy. The authority to complete the judiciary is vested in the federal government, which, regrettably, seems oblivious to the agony of the litigants in Azad Kashmir. Does this not support the plea that this authority shoul

Contributions Privacy Policy © DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2005