How to appoint judges: Is the judiciary independent? - 4
By Salahuddin Ahmed
This commission to be set up under the proposed Article 193-A is bound to recommend at least two candidates for each vacancy which means that if the two ministers agree on a candidate he will have to be nominated irrespective of his unsuitability in the opinion of either the Chief Justice of Pakistan or the chief justice of the high courts.
Out of these two, the final selection is to be made by the chief minister of the province. The joint parliamentary board envisaged in the Charter of Democracy is to get involved only at the stage of confirmation and is required either to confirm or not to confirm the only candidate selected by the chief minister. Even if all the opposition members vote against his confirmation the proposal does not say a word about how the deadlock is to be resolved and in any case the appointee will perhaps continue to function as an additional judge.
The seniority principles acknowledged by the Supreme Court for the appointment of the chief justice has been abandoned though the senior-most judge, who would himself be the most eligible candidate, is for some odd reason required to be a member of the commission. Is he expected to campaign for his own appointment during the deliberations of the commission?
Again for some strange reason, when the chief justice of the high court is to be appointed, the federal law minister is to chair the commission with the Chief Justice of Pakistan as one of its members to submit the list of two candidates for the kind consideration of the provincial chief minister. Are these provisions designed only to insult the office of the Chief Justice of Pakistan?
The procedure for appointment in the Supreme Court is even more ridiculous for the appointment of judges. The proposed Article 177-A contemplates the appointment of a commission consisting of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, the chief justices of the provincial high courts and the Islamabad High Court and the federal law minister. In all probability, most of the high court chief justices would themselves be candidates for elevation to the Supreme Court and would be vying for the support of the Chief Justice of Pakistan or the law ministry.
Again, the commission is only required to forward a panel of two names for each vacancy to the prime minister who will have the final word in selecting the one which will only be sent to the joint parliamentary committee for the stamp of confirmation. The seniority principles laid down in Malik Asad Ali case for the appointment of Chief Justice of Pakistan are treated contemptuously by proposing a commission headed by the law minister and comprising high court chief justices to make recommendations. It is absolutely incomprehensible as to how the law minister or the high court chief justices could in any manner acquire the capacity to know who would be the appropriate person to head the apex court.
The only way to defeat executive discretion would be for them to lobby and select one of their five colleagues while bypassing all the senior and competent judges of the Supreme Court.
The displacement of the Supreme Judicial Council through a commission selected in absolute executive discretion consisting of retired judges is a serious attempt to destroy the independence of the judiciary. The proposed provision places the security of the tenure of judges at the mercy of executive whims by empowering the commission to hold an enquiry upon the directions of the executive and simultaneously forcing a judge through a constitutional provision to proceed on leave. This only speaks of a manifest intention to keep the judiciary under the constant threat of executive control.
What needs to be kept in mind is that in any democratic society, the judiciary is viewed as the custodian of the rights and liberties of the oppressed. Indeed, the majority has the right to ensure this but those not in the majority and not even hoping to become part of the majority also have a right to survive and live with dignity and enjoy certain rights and freedom that are guaranteed to them by the constitution and the law. For the protection of these rights recourse to the judicial system is necessary. In a constitutional system under which the judiciary is entrusted with the duty to review executive action, it does not exercise executive powers but is required to keep a vigilant check on the manner executive or legislative powers are exercised. Therefore, unless its autonomy from executive control is ensured, no constitutional system worth its while can exist in any democratic system.
The seniority principle needs to be retained in the office of the chief justice otherwise it would cause a great deal of problems and heart burn. With respect to the appointment of judges in the Supreme Court and the high courts, I would propose that their appointment be made on the basis of the recommendations of committees which will ensure the independence of the judiciary, the participation of representatives of the public and the Bar and at the same time eliminate the possibilities of personal bias and preferences. This would enable the selection of candidates by consensus; a nominee who would be eminently suitable for the office of a judge.
The committee for appointing a Supreme Court judge should consist of: (a) The Chief Justice of Pakistan and two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court (b) The federal minister for law and justice or his nominee (c) The leader of the opposition in the National Assembly or his duly nominated representative (d) A duly nominated representative of the Pakistan Bar Council. Likewise the senior-most judge in the high court should be appointed chief justice, whereas for selection of judges, the committee should comprise the following:
(a) The Chief Justice of Pakistan and two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court (b) The chief justice of the high court and the two senior-most judges of that court (c) The federal minister for law and justice or his nominee (d) The provincial minister for law and justice or his nominee (e) A duly nominated member of the provincial bar council provided that he is not himself a candidate for appointment.
The major problem with the present system is that it entails delays in appointments and there is no disclosure of the opinion of various selectors. The way to overcome these flaws is to evolve an effective procedure. This could be done by stipulating that the particulars of prospective candidates may be circulated by the respective chief justices to members of the committees at least three weeks in advance to enable them to collect more information and form their own opinion. At least one third of the members of each committee (two in the case of the Supreme Court and three in the case of high courts) could also propose other candidates and suggest their names to the respective chief justices. The Chief Justice of Pakistan may then convene a meeting of each committee and after due deliberations, a person approved by at least two-thirds of the members of a committee may be appointed.
Concluded


First Cold War museum
By Kate Connolly
CHECKPOINT Charlie could become the site of Europe’s first Cold War museum, following a plea by some of the most significant figures of the post-war era, which divided the continent into capitalist West and communist East.
Former presidents, foreign ministers and ambassadors have written an open statement calling on the German government to act. They say that, almost two decades after the fall of the Berlin Wall, memories are fading fast, despite the art-house success of films such as Good Bye Lenin! and The Lives of Others, both set in communist East Berlin.
Vaclav Havel, the former Czech President, former Polish Foreign Minister Wladyslaw Bartoszewski, Germany’s former Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher and the former US ambassador to Germany, John Kornblum, are among those appealing for ‘the establishment of a Cold War museum’ to ‘safeguard for the long term the memory of the division of Europe and its liberation’. Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev has also given his backing to the project.
As the most famous crossing-point between East and West Berlin when the city was divided, Checkpoint Charlie has been suggested as the most appropriate site for a museum dedicated to lives on both sides of the Iron Curtain.
This week will see the last hurrah for Berlin’s Tempelhof airport, as the capital prepares to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Berlin airlift, when the Western allies broke a Soviet blockade to deliver supplies to the city. Veterans who landed planes laden with everything from sweets to coal every 90 seconds — will gather at the airport this week.–– The Guardian, London

