Original Articles

We borrowed it from South Africa?… No Sir!!

One of the questions that CJ and some other judges keep asking from the petitioner’s counsels is:  Does  parliament have a say in judicial appointments in other countries? Mr. Akram Shaikh in his arguments tried to mislead the court and tried to divert the question to the appointments in UK by the judicial commission which has no parliamentarian.

Mr.  Hamid Khan however came up with the response that we borrowed this procedure from South Africa. I know the reason why Akram Shaikh and Hamid Khan are reluctant to discuss in detail the appointments of judges in different parts of the world. The role of parliamentarians in appointment of judges is not alien to the world , there have been several research papers and discussion both in and out of the parliament in all parts of the world.

In UK , in 2005 , the Lord select committee published a detailed report explaining the changes made by the “Constitutional Reforms Act 2005” , please note that this act recommends a judicial appointments commission to play a key role in all the judicial appointments in future.

Then USIP produces a white paper (in January 2009) , discussing the same question of “Judicial appointments and Judicial Independence“. Let me quote some facts from this paper:

Systems of judicial appointments come in four basic configurations:
1. appointment by political institutions;
2. appointment by the judiciary itself;
3. appointment by a judicial council (which may include non-judge members);
4. selection through an electoral system.

Countries using the above configuration

1. appointment by political institutions; Most of East European Countries, Italy , South Korea, US , Brazil , Russia, Germany ,
2. appointment by the judiciary itself; India, Pakistan
3. appointment by a judicial council (which may include non-judge members); France, Iraq
4. selection through an electoral system. Japan , US States Court(recall procedure) ,

It is important to point out that Supreme Court of Pakistan is not the right institution to suggest which configuration is best for the people of Pakistan , this decision is made by the parliament and not by the judiciary all over the world. As I have been saying that the only valid reason for supreme court to review the 18th amendment or any amendment in the constitution is to see if the amendment violates any of the fundamental rights of the people of Pakistan.

I do however agree on one point that the judicial independence has a relationship with the judicial appointment procedure , particularly in case of appointment of High Court and Supreme Court judges. We already have seen that how appointment by a single authority, be it the president/government of Pakistan or Chief Justice of Pakistan, can be misused to compromise the independence of judiciary. There are no two opinions about that.

But we need to understand that it is the parliament who is going to decide which procedure is better to appoint the judges. And in 18th amendment parliament has decided unanimously what is the right procedure.

Hamid Khan today (Monday) , kept harping about the “basic structure” in the light of “Objective Resolution” , we must note that both of these terms “basic structure of the constitution” and “Objective Resolution” are the weapons in the hands of establishment to undermine the powers of Parliament.  The notion of basic structure of constitution was invented by the Peerzadas of Pakistan , (ab)using it from the Indian Supreme Court verdict to safeguard the rights of minorities in India.

Basic structure theory should not be abused. The founders of 1973 constitution deliberately used the “Objective Resolution” as the preamble and knew that Objective resolution in no way provides the mechanism or concrete guide of its own implementation , therefore it can not be an operative part in the constitution. I would touch in more detail how “Objective resolution” is mere an abstract statement on what guidelines to observe in framing the constitution. “Objective Resolution” can not be used to form a “basic structure” of constitution of Pakistan during the course of this case.

I still miss Aitzaz Ahsan in this case.

About the author



Click here to post a comment
  • Here’s what I want to know – Where is the Ghairat Brigade now? Isn’t it quite funny that you don’t hear anyone crying about sovereignty when Hamid Khan says that we should follow the example of India?

  • Self-proclaimed guardians of Islam

    ترمیم کیس: قرار داد مقاصد میں تبدیلی مجرمانہ غفلت ہے، چیف جسٹس

    Updated at 1600 PST

    اسلام آباد…سپریم کورٹ نے قیام پاکستان کی قرار داد مقاصد سے اقلیتوں کی مذہبی آزادی کو ضیا الحق کے دور میں آئین سے نکالے جانے کو مجرمانہ غفلت قرار دیتے ہوئے کہا ہے کہ اقلیتوں کی آزادی کی بحالی کا سہرا موجودہ پارلیمنٹ کو جاتا ہے ۔آئین میں18ویں ترمیم کیخلاف دائر درخواستوں کے مقدمہ میں سپریم کورٹ بار کے وکیل حامد خان نے ججز تقرری کی ترمیم کیخلاف دلائل جاری رکھے۔ ایک درخواست گزار عبدالحفیظ پیرزادہ نے درخواست کی کہ انہیں1973 کے آئین کیلئے ماضی کی پارلیمانی بحث کا ریکارڈ دیا جائے۔ حامد خان نے دلائل میں کہا کہ ججز تقرری کے لئے جوڈیشل کمیشن کا تصور جنوبی افریقہ سے لیا گیا جہاں نظام حکومت صدارتی ہے۔ بینچ کے رکن جسٹس ثاقب نثار نے کہا کہ برطانیہ میں پابندی ہے کہ کوئی پارلیمانی رکن جوڈیشل کمیشن کا ممبر نہیں ہوسکتا ، چیف جسٹس نے پوچھا کہ کیا پاکستان میں کبھی کسی آئینی ترمیم کو سپریم کورٹ نے کالعدم قرار دیا ؟تو حامد خان نے جواب دیا کہ پاکستان میں ایسا نہیں ہوا البتہ بھارت میں آئینی ترمیم کو کالعدم قرار دیا جاچکا ہے۔ جسٹس جواد ایس خواجہ نے کہا کہ25 سال تک اس معاملے کا نوٹس نہ لینا بے توجہی کی ایک واضح مثال ہے ، مقدمہ کی مزید سماعت کل ہوگی۔

  • The “follow indian courts” is a standard procedure in pakistani courts due to similarity and a common origin of indian and pakistani laws. if i remember correctly, the relevance order of court orders is like this
    1. pak courts
    2. indian courts
    3. british courts
    4. rest of the world

  • تمہاری زلف میں پنہچی تو حسن کہلائی

    ملا کے طرفدار اب انڈیا کے حوالے دے رہے ہیں – بہت خوب

    میٹھا میٹھا ہپ ہپ کڑوا کڑوا تھو تھو

  • @adnan
    The question is not to follow Indian or Pakistani court , the Indian supreme court decision on the basis of “basic structure theory” is not relevent here , btw in many of the cases supreme court of pakistan has preferred US supreme court over both UK and Indian.

  • I dont know if you are lawyers or not but from your speech ignorance is clear.

    First of all India is only the most similar democracy because of having a written Constituion and a parliamentary system.

    Secondly Sovereignty of Parliament is not necessarily the path to success specially in our country where the Parliamentarians are the most shameless of all height of corruption is beyond and what to say about the executives of Pakistan, the head of state is the one we receive gr8st number of jokes on.

    so Finally if our current system has apparently bounded executives and others to interfere with judiciary we should try to protect it instead of bringing it down! let it be an undiluted community, atleast as much as it can be instead of sabotaging it!

  • @khalid
    whether U are an expert political analyst or not, but your hate for democratic process and your source of knowledge extraction is evident from your shameless and abusive way, I think in your view even the parliamentary system is not the only path to success as U have some better choices like khilafat etc. etc.
    And for your kind information we all know where most of the jokes originate against the President and Faraz Marhoom. Atleast it is not the criteria for disqualifying someone who got peoples votes, but here you will again call some GAALIS to the illiterate peoples who do not identify the real Gems like Kazi, Imran etc etc. Or the least better choice for people like you. i.e NS

  • This coming year Come early july provides Your five Fridays Your five Saturdays as well as Your five Sundays. This happens once each and every 823 a long time. This is whats called income totes. Consequently duplicate this specific in your wall membrane and funds can arrive inside of Four times. Determined by Oriental philosophy regarding Feng Shui. People that read and don’t copy is going to be without income.