Pakistan’s Judicial Restructuring

Despite Pakistan’s troubled history of executive-judiciary relations and frequent attempts by the executive to pack or sack the judiciary, public opinion seems to be wary of granting the judiciary greater powers over its composition. In a recent editorial, The Dawn
takes on Nawaz Sharif’s suggestion that the Chief Justice and the judiciary comprise a majority of members of a proposed Judicial Appointments Commission.

As they argue, “A hermetically sealed judicial institution of that sort is antithetical to the principles of democracy. Why should the present membership of a state institution determine what its future membership will be? Remember that judges are free to vote with their conscience once sworn in because it is virtually impossible to remove them before they retire (which is how it should be). What Pakistan needs is a judiciary free from interference, not a judiciary that is independent in the sense of deciding its own membership”

I am curious as to what prompts this critique, which was not so prominently made in the early days when the Indian Supreme Court gradually assumed powers of appointment. It could be driven by a sense of unease with the present incumbent, or from having experienced the folly of insulating one branch of government from checks and balances.

Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

1 Comment
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Nick Robinson
Nick Robinson
11 years ago

I think it is a concern that the current Supreme Court has gotten out of hand and no one can stand up to the CJ. Also, they have the Indian model to look at – the Friday Times ran a few pieces on the appointment question a couple weeks ago, and one strand that came out was "look at all the problems India is having with the collegium, we don't want to copy that." Finally, there have been some questionable appointments made in the High Courts (and arguably the S. Ct.) recently – these were basically Chaudhry appointees as the executive doesn't have the power to stand up to him right now.

Regardless, the 18th amendment did seem to go through yesterday–bi-05, albeit with some slight modification to the appointment model that I still need to find details about.