The president of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Yahya Afridi, welcomed the transfer of judges to the Superior Court of Islamabad (IHC) in the midst of the opposition of the legal fraternity of the capital, qualifying the move as a “fair opportunity” for the judges of other provinces.
President Asif Ali Zardari approved on Saturday the transfer of a judge of the higher courts of Lahore, Baluchistan and Sindh al IHC, despite the opposition of five IHC judges. They had warned in a letter to the best judges that any movement of this type “would violate constitutional procedures and judicial norms.”
The CJP comments occur when the Islamabad Bar Association, the Bar Association of the Superior Court of Islamabad and the Bar Association of the Islamabad district observed a strike in the district courts and the IHC today to protest what they called what they called what they called “unconstitutional measures” that undermine the judicial and legal profession.
During the oath taking of the Press Association of the Supreme Court (PAS), CJP Afridi, while welcoming the transfer of judges, said that the IHC was not part of any area, but that it belonged to the whole country .
“The judges of other provinces should also have a fair opportunity,” said CJP Afridi.
The CJP said the problem regarding the transfer of judges should not be confused with the appointment of judges.
“The appointment and transfer of judges are two separate issues,” said CJP Afridi, adding that the judges who were transferred to the IHC were already judges of the Superior Court.
He appreciated the initiative and said the process should continue in the future.
“Islamabad is the symbol of the Federation. A judge who speaks Baluchis has joined, a Sindhi speech judge has joined, so you must rejoice [this moment]”The CJP said, stating that the Federation belonged to all.
“The transfer occurred according to the Constitution. It is a good step taken in article 200, ”he said. “More judges should come from other provinces,” added the CJP.
He said that, as president of the Supreme Court, his vision should be broader and that there was a need for more judges in the SC, highlighting that he heard 40 cases today.
Traditionally, the senior judge of Puisne of a superior court is appointed as the president of the Supreme Court. Even so, the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) last year introduced new rules to avoid the criterion of seniority in the light of the 26th amendment. The commission proposed that the president of the Superior Court could be appointed among the panel of five senior judges.
Scba welcomes the ‘healthy exercise’ of the transfer of judges’
Separately, the Association of Lawyers of the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCBA) also welcomed the transfer of judges from other courts higher than IHC, qualifying it as a “healthy exercise.”
“We believe that the rotation of judges among the different higher courts under constitutional provisions is a healthy year,” reads a press release issued by the president of SCBA, Mian Rouf Atta.
Stating that the association has always defended the rule of law, the independence of the Judiciary and the supremacy of the Constitution, the SCBA said: “We appreciate and approve the transfer of judges to the Superior Court of Islamabad.”
“We believe that the rotation of judges among the different higher courts under constitutional provisions is a healthy year,” he said.
“It allows the best legal minds to obtain exposure in different courts, cementing and strengthening even more the judiciary while counteracting any selective justice.”
The SCBA also categorically disapproved “all criticisms of the matter, which, in our opinion, is improper, unfounded and politically motivated.”
The SCBA explained that article 200 (transfer of judges of the Superior Courts) “allows the President to transfer the judges of the Superior Court with their consent and after consulting the main judges of the higher courts in question and the president of the Supreme Court of Pakistan “.
“We observe that the President has exercised this constitutional provision, and due process for such transfers has been completely adhered,” he added.
The association continued to argue that article 194 (oath of the position) of the Constitution was not applied in the current matter, since the judges were transferred and “do not quote to the IHC”.
The SCBA stressed that the IHC was “once considered the Federal Superior Court, ensuring the same representation of all provinces,” and added that recent transfers had restored that state.
He also emphasized that recent development was not the first of its kind. “In the IHC alone, there [have been] Numerous cases, even among the titular judges, who have been transferred from other higher courts. “
“It is not necessary to mention that the judges recently transferred to the IHC will retain their age from the date of their initial appointments in the higher courts of which they have been transferred,” reads the SCBA statement.
More to follow