Justice Shah told draft rules carry his suggestions
• Justice Mandokhail responds to letter, shares copy with other JCP members
• Requests senior puisne judge to propose judges’ names for high courts after rules approval
• Invites suggestions before rules-making committee meets again tomorrow
ISLAMABAD: In a prompt response to a letter of senior puisne judge of the Supreme Court Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, chairman of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s (JCP) rule-making committee Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail on Saturday assured him that most of his suggestions have already been incorporated into the draft rules on judges’ appointment.
Justice Mandokhail, in his two-page letter, copies of which have also been shared with other JCP members, reminded Justice Shah that the committee had met twice to deliberate upon the framing of draft rules. In these meetings, the committee also took into consideration the JCP Rules, 2010.
In his five-page letter to the chairman of the rule-making committee, Justice Shah had called upon the JCP to urgently finalise ‘clear and transparent rules’ for appointing judges to constitutional courts, warning that any appointments without such a framework would be unconstitutional and could undermine judiciary’s independence.
The detailed letter, written on Dec 12, underscored the constitutional obligation under Article 175A(4) that required the JCP to establish procedures and criteria for assessing and appointing the judges, and expressed deep concern that absence of those rules would jeopardise the rule of law, democracy, and public confidence in the judiciary.
Justice Mandokhail said he received the letter on Dec 13, after the JCP had been reconstituted under the 26th amendment, of which both he and Justice Shah besides other judges were members. Since the JCP is vested with the power to make rules under the constitution, the letter added, the commission in its Dec 6 meeting unanimously authorised JCP chairman Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi to constitute a committee to fulfil the constitutional obligation.
Subsequently, the CJP with Justice Shah’s consultation constituted a panel and tasked it with drafting rules related to the regulation of procedure, including the procedure and criteria for assessment, evaluation and fitness for appointment of judges under Article 175A(4), the letter said, adding that the committee in its two meetings took into consideration the JCP Rules, 2010, and deliberated upon the framing of draft rules.
“It is important to mention here that incidentally, most of the suggestions/requirements highlighted by you (Justice Shah) in the letter have already been incorporated in the draft rules, which, I had personally shared with you, prior to your letter under reply,” the letter said.
Justice Mandokhail emphasised that the committee was tasked with proposing the draft rules and placing them before the JCP for a final approval in its meeting scheduled to be held on Dec 21.
Names proposed for elevation
“I have also come to know that you have proposed names of the candidates for their elevation to the Lahore High Court and Islamabad High Court. I suggest that you may propose these names or more, after approval of the rules by the commission, so that proper elevations are made,” he wrote.
Justice Mandokhail, however, appreciated Justice Shah’s suggestions, assuring him he was also of a firm view that it is the mandate of the constitution that the judiciary must be independent and impartial. “Members of the judiciary should be competent and honest persons. For this purpose, the committee constituted for making the draft rules is committed to evolve best mechanism while framing these rules in order to achieve the desired goal.”
He said he would wait for any other suggestion before the cut-off date of framing of draft rules, expressing the confidence that the concerns shown by Justice Shah through his letter stand redressed. The committee would meet on Monday (Dec 16) again, he added.
About the 26th amendment, Justice Mandokhail observed he would like not to comment on it as the matter was sub judice before the Supreme Court.
He said he expected every JCP member to thoroughly go through the draft rules and was free to submit any suggestion before its approval. However, the JCP was competent to approve as it is, to amend or to reject the draft rules, Justice Mandokhail explained.
Published in Dawn, December 15th, 2024