KARACHI, Feb 8: Instead of impinging on the independence of the judiciary, the enhancement of the superior court judges’ retirement age would enable the state to benefit from their learning and experience a little longer, Attorney-General Makhdoom Ali Khan said in a statement here on Saturday.
Referring to the criticism of the decision to increase the superannuation age of the members of the superior judiciary, he said the ‘fact was that for a long time a need was felt to allow experienced judges to continue to serve for a longer period of time’. Many judges who retired quite a few years ago were still leading an active professional life as arbitrators, consultants and academics, he added.
The Pakistan Law Commission, the AG recalled, had recommended as far back as 1997 under the chairmanship of the then chief justice of Pakistan that ‘one way of tackling the backlog and ensuring an expeditious disposal of cases would be to retain the services of judges beyond the prescribed age of superannuation’.
“This would be possible,” the AG quoted the PLC as recommending, “by enhancing the retirement age of judges. An obvious advantage of this recommendation is that the nation will avail the services of qualified and experienced judges with proven competence and integrity, without having to incur heavy financial expenditure. The government may, therefore, consider this option and agree to take appropriate steps for its implementation”.
Besides implementing the recommendation of the highest judicial policymaking body, the AG said, the enhanced retirement age was also in consonance with the international practice. In the United States, he pointed out, the judges of the supreme court and of other federal courts retired at will. If a judge feels that he cannot discharge his functions by reason of old age, he retires and receives the last drawn salary as pension for the rest of his life.
In India, he said, judges of the high court retired at 62 and those of supreme court at 65 but the Justice Venkatachaliah committee appointed to review the working of the constitution had already recommended that the retirement age be extended by three years in both cases.
In the United Kingdom, the AG said, there was no age of retirement for superior court judges previously. Now a judge cannot sit in the Privy Council or any superior court after attaining the age of 75. The new law does not apply to the judges appointed before its enactment. “It is for this reason that Lord Denning, the best known British judge of the
20th century, did not step down till he was 83. Even under the new law, the lord chancellor may perform judicial functions in the House of Lords beyond the age of 75.”
The AG mentioned the retirement age of judges in Australia as 70, in Canada as 75, in Germany as 68, and in the Philippines and Jamaica as 70. In New Zealand and Singapore, he said, judges retired at 65 but may be given extension for more than one term.
“It is apparent from the above that every country, given its own circumstances, determines the age of superannuation for its judges. In many of these the age is more than in Pakistan. Increase in the age in any event neither affects the independence of the judiciary nor its impartiality,” he concluded. The AG, who is ex-officio chairman of the Pakistan Bar Council, did not specifically refer to the PBC stance on the matter but alluded to ‘criticism’ of the extension decision in general.