ISLAMABAD: For several days, widespread rumours claiming that Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa postponed the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) meeting in May to “facilitate the government’s judicial package”, which also provisions increasing judges’ retirement age to give “extension” to the top Supreme Court judge.
The reality, however, might differ from the speculations making the rounds on various digital media platforms as argued by Reema Omer, a legal expert and lawyer, who has debunked the alleged reports in light of the minutes of the JCP’s meeting as well as a letter penned by the top judge.
It is to be noted that the federal government, on multiple occasions, has refuted any plans to give an extension to the chief justice who is set to retire next month (October).
Taking to social media account X, formerly Twitter, Omer referred to the minutes of the JCP meeting that revealed about the session’s postponement on the request of the federal law minister, who had requested the forum to defer it as the government was considering “amending Article 175A of the Constitution” as the “constitution of the Commission may be changed.”
Screengrab of tweet. — X/@reema_omer
Screengrab of tweet. — X/@reema_omer
Furthermore, according to the lawyer, the record stated that Justice Yahya Afridi had then suggested that the discussion on the agenda should be deferred and the meeting should be postponed in light of the incumbent government’s intention to propose amendments to the Constitution — a suggestion agreed upon by all members.
Screengrab of tweet. — X/@reema_omer
Screengrab of tweet. — X/@reema_omer
Apart from the JCP meeting’s record, the legal expert also expands on the letter penned by CJP Isa on August 28 — to the chief justices of the four high courts — wherein the top judge said that he had in fact wanted the JCP’s meeting to proceed but it was “postponed in deference to the wishes of the majority”.
“The rules of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan were enacted in 2010, and heeding to the persistent demand of bar councils and bar associations to make the process of nomination transparent and democratic, I constituted a committee to propose amendments to the said rules.
“The said committee submitted its report, and a meeting was called on May 3, 2024, for the consideration of its recommendations. I wanted the meeting to proceed, however, the meeting was postponed in deference to the wishes of the majority. To consider the recommendations of the committee, a meeting has again been called,” said the chief justice.
In his letter, the top judge went on to request the high court CJs to commence their search for potential candidates to be nominated as additional judges of their respective courts.
Copies of the minutes of the meeting (left) and CJP Isas letter. — X/@reema_omer
Copies of the minutes of the meeting (left) and CJP Isa’s letter. — X/@reema_omer
Henceforth, it seems that the rumours about the reason behind the postponement of the JCP meeting are in direct contrast with the facts as reflected via the meeting’s record coupled with the CJP’s letter which discloses that the meeting was deferred on the law minister’s request and Justice Afridi’s suggestion.
It should be noted that the extension rumours were further exacerbated after a bill seeking an amendment to the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1997, was tabled in the Senate on Monday to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court to 20 — other than the chief justice — to “address the rising number of pending cases”.
The bill titled “Supreme Court (Number of Judges) (Amendment) Act”, 2024, was presented by an independent senator from Balochistan, Mohammad Abdul Qadir seeking the increase in the number of top court judges from 17 to 21.
A day earlier, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) parliamentarian Daniyal Chaudhry tabled a similar bill in the National Assembly called for increasing the number of judges to 23 — a proposition staunchly opposed by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).
The bill was eventually deferred in the Lower House after the speaker — following the argument by PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Khan that such a bill could not be introduced as a private member’s bill as involving expenditures from the Federal Consolidated Fund could only be introduced by the government under Articles 74 and 81 of the Constitution — Law Minister Tarar to do so, The News reported on Wednesday.
Speaking at an event in Islamabad on Monday, Federal Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar noted that the CJP has “clearly told me and the attorney general that he doesn’t want an extension”.
 Qazi Faez Isa postponed the Judicial){kind=link}