LAHORE, Aug 25: The Joint Action Committee of lawyers on Monday demanded that the proposed appointments of the Lahore High Court’s eight judges, approved by Gen Musharraf, should be deferred till the settlement of the Legal Framework Order issue.

The demand was made through a resolution by Supreme Court Bar Association president Hamid Khan, Lahore High Court Bar Association president Hafiz Abdul Rehman Ansari, Pakistan Bar Council’s executive committee chairman Kazim Khan and other office-bearers of various Bar associations.

The resolution warned of a constitutional crisis if the proposed appointments were made forthwith.

Gen Pervez Musharraf had last week approved the names of Bilal Khan and Nasim Sabir Chaudhry (Punjab’s additional advocates-general), LHC registrar Sheikh Abdul Rashid, Lahore District and Sessions Judge Akram Bitu, Chaudhry Muzzamil Khan, Sardar Aslam, Sheikh Hakim Ali and Chaudhry Ghani for appointment as the LHC judges. The federal law ministry has yet to issue notification of the appointments.

“Chief Justice Sheikh Riaz Ahmad, who recommended the names of the LHC judges, retired on March 8, 2003, and has lost the mandate to recommend the names of the judges after availing the three-year extension under the LFO.

“Gen Pervez Musharraf, who approved the eight recommendations, is himself a self-imposed president. Therefore, no such appointments can be made unless Parliament decides the fate of the LFO under the procedure prescribed by the 1973 Constitution,” the lawyers resolved unanimously.

They maintained that the office of the sitting chief justice had become controversial in the aftermath of three-year extension. The Supreme Court ruled in Al-Jihad Trust case that no recommendation could be made in this regard by a controversial judge.

The lawyers’ representatives feared that the appointment of judges to the high courts before the settlement of the LFO issue would create a situation identical to 1996 when certain judges had to vacate their offices following a SC judgment.

They made it clear that the SCBA would challenge these appointments in the Supreme Court if the LFO provision regarding the three-year extension was struck down by Parliament.

“The SCBA’s decision to boycott the Supreme Court regarding the constitutional matters is not permanent. It can be withdrawn if the LFO is abolished and the judges currently working under the extended tenures vacate their respective offices. The remaining judges of superior courts should also sworn in afresh under the 1973 Constitution following the abolition of the LFO,” Hamid Khan said.