Former Supreme Court Bar President Criticizes Judicial Appointments Amid Constitutional Amendment Challenges

Quetta:Former President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Amanullah Kannarani, has strongly criticized recent developments related to judicial appointments under the 26th constitutional amendment. In a statement, Kannarani emphasized that whenever constitutional amendments have been challenged in the past, they were taken seriously. He pointed to past cases, including the amendments in Articles 13/14, the controversial 58(2)B and 63A clauses, and the 18th Amendment, which led to changes in the composition of Pakistan’s Judicial Commission and the Parliamentary Committee under Article 175-A of the Constitution.

Kannarani noted that in both these instances, the implementation of new amendments was temporarily halted, and added that the current situation is no different. He stated that the 26th constitutional amendment has been challenged by lawyers, political parties, and various organizations, yet there has been no date set for its hearing. Instead, Kannarani accused the authorities of using the amendment to expedite the appointment of “preferred” judges, claiming this would undermine the judiciary’s independence and transform it into a political tool.

Kannarani criticized the government’s actions, suggesting that by favoring the legislative and executive branches over the judiciary in these appointments, a “parallel judicial system” would be created that could easily be manipulated. He pointed out that this would have lasting consequences for the country’s judicial system. Kannarani referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in *PLD 2014 SC 131*, where the court had explicitly prohibited legislators from recommending judicial appointments as it amounted to “political bribery.”

The former bar president also reflected on past decisions, such as the 2010 agreement among political parties to appoint the Chief Justice based on seniority, which has now been reversed. He suggested that the ongoing process of judicial appointments could lead to an overwhelming number of judges being nominated by members of the Judicial Commission for personal or political reasons, turning the judiciary into a “bazaar.”

Kannarani warned that if the government continued its current approach, it could severely damage the judiciary’s integrity and independence. He called for the suspension of all judicial appointments under the 26th Amendment until the Supreme Court hears and decides on the challenges against it. He urged that no appointments be made under the so-called “kangaroo amendments” until a full review is conducted, similar to the situation in 2010 when the 18th Amendment was challenged by Nadeem Ahmad Sheikh’s case, resulting in a temporary halt.