Peshawar High Court (PHC) has issued notices to the office of Prime Minister and Ministry of Law in a constitutional petition seeking the removal of Chairman Appellate Tribunal of Pakistan (ATP). It is reliably learnt that the petition has been moved by a Peshawar-based citizen for removal of public office holder wherein after hearing the arguments, a division bench of the PHC has issued notices to the Office of Prime Minister, public office holder and Ministry of Law while Law Ministry has also been asked to file comments before the PHC within 20 days.
When contacted, tax lawyer Waheed Shahzad Butt told this correspondent that on the issue of appointment of a person as judge, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in CP No. 29 and CP No. 805 has categorically held that to become a judge under Article 193 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, advocate should be a man of integrity. Those who perform the functions of the judges or chief justice must be not only men of deep insight, profound knowledge of the Sharia, but they must also be Allah fearing, forth right, honest, sincere men of integrity.
The order (CP No. 29 and CP No. 805) said, "So far as dispensing of justice is concerned, you have to be very careful in selecting officers for the same. You must select people of excellent character, superior calibre and meritorious record. Political affiliation alone may not disqualify the candidate provided he is a person of unimpeachable integrity, having sound knowledge in law, the order added.
Waheed further said that another three-judge bench of Supreme Court in CP No. 3 and CMA No. 8540 of 2015 has elaborated that if the competent authority itself starts cherry picking by deliberately ignoring and overlooking meritorious candidates in appointment, the image of the institution will be tainted beyond repair. Such practice may lead to distrust of the public in the judicial institution of the country.
The petitioner urged the PHC that notification, appointing the public office holder, to hold the public office as judicial authority and thereafter as head of quasi judicial institution in BS-22 is illegal and of no legal effect and accordingly it may be cancelled and declared patently illegal, ab initio void and public office holder may be de-seated / removed from the post with return of benefits already enjoyed.
Comments
Comments are closed.