Published on: August 24, 2025 4:52 PM
The Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s (JCP) sub-committee has opposed, by majority, a proposal to set formal criteria for nominating judges to constitutional benches, sending the matter back for further consideration. The five-member meeting, headed by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, deliberated on the issue at the Supreme Court and reflected a clear divide among the participants.
Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan and Senator Farooq H. Naek rejected the idea of fixed rules for nominations, while Senator Barrister Ali Zafar strongly supported it. Representing the opposition, Zafar argued that criteria are necessary to regulate discretion within the JCP, ensuring transparency and consistency in the sensitive process of judicial nominations.
The Pakistan Bar Council’s (PBC) representative, Ahsen Bhoon, sided with the majority, emphasizing that only the JCP itself is empowered under Article 191A of the Constitution to frame such rules. He added that formal mechanisms for nominations cannot be introduced through sub-committee recommendations alone, which is why the matter was referred back.
This sub-committee was formed after Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, in his role as JCP chairman, created a broad-based committee on June 19, 2025. The committee’s mandate included drafting rules for annual judicial performance evaluation of high court judges and proposing criteria for appointments to constitutional benches under the 26th Amendment.
However, the panel’s majority stance against creating fixed nomination criteria means the debate is far from settled. The issue has now been returned to the full JCP, where members will reconsider whether formal rules are necessary or whether existing discretionary powers should remain intact.
The division highlights a growing debate within the legal community over how best to balance judicial independence with accountability. With key stakeholders split on the matter, the final decision by the JCP could have long-term implications for the nomination process and the credibility of constitutional benches.
