JCP Member Resignation Sparks Debate Over Judicial Appointments
The resignation of Akhtar Hussain from the JCP has brought attention to the controversies surrounding judicial appointments, with concerns over transparency and the role of non-judicial members in the selection process. The development is likely to have far-reaching implications for the judiciary and the legal community, with the PBC's nomination of a new representative and the JCP's appointment of a new member being closely watched.
Akhtar Hussain, a senior Supreme Court lawyer and member of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP), has resigned citing controversies surrounding judicial appointments, including the elevation of six judges to the Supreme Court and the transfer of Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar to the Islamabad High Court.
Hussain's resignation came after the JCP appointed six new judges to the SC, sparking criticism from legal and political circles. He expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of consensus on nominees and the decision-making process, stating that decisions are being taken on the basis of majority during JCP meetings. The move has sparked debate among lawyers, with some criticizing the 26th Constitutional Amendment and the independence of the judiciary.
The Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) is scheduled to nominate a new representative for the JCP, with Ahsan Bhoon being a likely candidate. Hussain's resignation has been accepted, and a new member will be nominated by the PBC. A JCP meeting has been scheduled for February 26 to choose a new member. The resignation has highlighted concerns about the appointment process, with Hussain noting that non-judicial members hold a majority in the selection process, which he believes lacks transparency.
The development is likely to have significant implications for the judiciary and the legal community, with many watching closely to see how the situation unfolds. The PBC's nomination of a new representative and the JCP's appointment of a new member will be closely monitored, as the debate over judicial appointments and the independence of the judiciary continues.
