ISLAMABAD: Though it has yet to regain the powers it lost more than three years ago, the Parliamentary Committee (PC) on appointment of superior court judges has started flexing its muscles and has overruled the recommendation of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) for removal of two additional judges of the Sindh High Court (SHC), according to sources.

Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, the JCP on June 12 had not granted extension to the two SHC judges, Justice Farooq Ali Channa and Justice Riazat Ali Sahar.

After such a recommendation, the judges concerned are normally removed from their positions because the PC usually gives a nod to the JCP recommendations.

PC ‘granted’ a one-year extension to two additional judges after ‘setting aside’ the JCP’s recommendations

However, in this case this did not happen and the PC ‘granted’ a one-year extension to the two additional judges after ‘setting aside’ the JCP’s recommendations. This has happened for the first time.

When asked, a senior official of the PC said: “We have examined the record of the SHC judges and found that there were no complaints of corruption, misuse of authority or other charges against the said judges.”

The JCP recommended their removal because the language used by them in some of their judgments was not up to the mark, he said.

“We discussed this and are of the opinion that perhaps because the judges were from government schools their writing skills were not up to the mark. But this is not such a serious issue that it may cost someone his job,” the official remarked.

The PC ‘granted extension’ to the two judges because it wanted to provide them with an opportunity to improve their writing skills, he said. “We did it in accordance with the Constitution.”

The PC has begun asserting its authority at a time when its sub-committee is about to submit to it a report including recommendations about how its role in the appointment of superior court judges could be enhanced.

The sources said that if required a law would be passed to make the PC an effective body instead of a ‘rubber-stamp’ panel.

Under the 18th Amendment, the JCP was empowered to nominate and recommend the names of lawyers for appointment as judges in the superior courts. The PC’s job was to endorse the recommendations or otherwise.

Meanwhile, the controversy over the powers of the PC and the JCP surfaced in October 2010 after then chief justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, while hearing petitions against the 18th Amendment, diluted the PC’s powers and held that “if the Parliamentary Committee disagrees or rejects any recommendations of the Judicial Commission, it shall give specific reasons and the Prime Minister shall send copy of the said opinion of the Committee to the Chief Justice of Pakistan and the same shall be justiciable by the Supreme Court”.

After the verdict, the government introduced the 19th Amendment, but did not give the JCP a final say in the appointment of judges. However, in February 2011 when the PC had rejected the JCP’s recommendations about four additional judges of the Lahore High Court and two of the SHC, the supporters of the aggrieved judges took the matter to the Supreme Court.

Deciding the petitions, the apex court observed that the PC was not mandated to evaluate the professional capabilities of the lawyers to be appointed as judges.

Published in Dawn, June 22nd, 2014