Debating seniority

Published January 8, 2022

IT is a moment to celebrate. Justice Ayesha A. Malik’s nomination to the Supreme Court marks the first time in our history that a woman judge has been approved for elevation to the highest court in the land.

Among the judgements she has authored as a judge of the Lahore High Court is the landmark verdict that declared the two-finger ‘virginity’ test as “illegal and against the Constitution” — an indictment of a system that subjected rape victims to additional distress and humiliation. Justice Malik’s competence in other areas of the law has also been hailed. But for many activists, what counts most is the hope she personifies as a woman judge who would be able to empathise more deeply than her male colleagues with the hardships and trauma faced by women seeking justice.

Secondly, in a country which last year ranked third from the bottom in terms of male-female parity, the Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s vote in her favour can also be seen as a step towards gender equality in the highest echelons of the judiciary itself. With Pakistan approaching the 75th anniversary of its birth, this fundamental right has been long overdue.

But it has not been smooth sailing. And the ‘impediment’ — the principle of seniority — merits a serious discussion by all stakeholders. Justice Malik’s nomination was rejected last September due to a lack of consensus in the JCP. This year too the vote in her favour was razor-thin: 5-4. The opposition to her proposed appointment has not been without reason and has to led to calls for protests and boycotts by several lawyers including bar councils.

Justice Malik is the fourth most senior judge at the Lahore High Court, and her nomination is being seen as an out-of-turn promotion. Similar controversy had been stirred when Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, a relatively junior judge at the Sindh High Court, was appointed to the Supreme Court last year after the JCP voted 5-4 in his favour too. There have been several other cases where the seniority standard has been bypassed.

One of the judges that opposed the nominations of both Justice Malik and Justice Mazhar was Justice Faez Isa. In a recent letter to the chief justice of Pakistan, Justice Isa stated: “Once the nomination and selection criteria are determined, it will help dispel misgivings that arbitrariness in the selection process holds sway.” There is much logic to what is essentially Justice Isa’s call for transparency in judicial appointments.

But that task, as previously suggested by senior lawyers, cannot be achieved without the input of those representing the legal system, parliament and civil society as well as others. It is only by establishing in clear terms what qualifies a judge for a higher position, and how one judge is more qualified than the other, that controversies will disappear and nominations such as Justice Malik’s can be celebrated without reservations.

Published in Dawn, January 8th, 2022

Opinion

Editorial

Unsustainable growth
Updated 23 Jun, 2026

Unsustainable growth

CLICHÉS are an essential part of political rhetoric. But when repeated often, they lose their impact. So when...
Banned speeches
23 Jun, 2026

Banned speeches

NATIONAL Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq on Sunday formally lifted long-standing restrictions on the airing of ...
New GB government
23 Jun, 2026

New GB government

WITH the newly elected lawmakers of the Gilgit-Baltistan Assembly taking oath on Monday, the PPP looks set to head...
A costly cut
Updated 22 Jun, 2026

A costly cut

Climate risks are increasing and public investment should reflect that reality.
Guarded access
22 Jun, 2026

Guarded access

ONE of the government’s ‘novel’ proposals to snag tax evaders has collided with some harsh realities. On...
Lyari’s passion
22 Jun, 2026

Lyari’s passion

THE love for football in Lyari knows no bounds. The World Cup might be underway thousands of miles away in North...