JCP member steps down in protest
Hussain, who was nominated thrice by the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) to the JCP, submitted his resignation to Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, who also heads the commission. His two-year term at the JCP was going to end in July 2025. In his letter, he expressed dissatisfaction with the process adopted for elevation of six more judges to the apex court.
"On present controversies with regard to judicial appointments, I am unable to continue and, hereby, resign as a member of the JCP," he wrote, requesting the PBC to nominate a new representative in his place. Hussain, however, assured his continued support for judicial independence and democratic institutions.
The resignation came shortly after the JCP appointed six new judges to the SC, a move that sparked criticism from some legal and political circles. Talking to The Express Tribune, Hussain raised questions about the recent appointments in the superior courts.
He said nothing had changed in the appointment process after the 26th Constitutional Amendment.
"Earlier, chief justices had a dominant role in the appointment process and now the executive has taken over the control of the commission.
Hussain lamented that no effort is being made to develop consensus on nominees.
"A committee should have been formed to shortlist the judicial candidates on merit and evolve consensus among the JCP members. Instead of taking decisions on merit, decisions are being taken on the basis of majority during the JCP meeting," he added.
It is learnt that a PBC meeting is scheduled for February 26 to nominate a new bar representative for the JCP. It is likely that Ahsan Bhoon will be nominated as the new JCP member.
According to sources, the Independent group which is majority in the superior bars was upset with Akhtar Hussain due to his decision to oppose the proposal regarding the elevation of two Lahore High Court (LHC) judges to the apex court.
He had also expressed concern about the transfer of LHC's Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar to the Islamabad High Court. He had also dissented to the elevation of Justice Aamer Farooq to the SC until a judicial decision on the seniority of IHC judges.
After the JCP meeting of February 10, Hussain had no choice but either to follow the group's guidelines or tender his resignation. However, lawyers who are critical of the 26th Constitutional Amendment believe that damage has already been done as 43 judges have been appointed to superior courts.
The JCP by a majority vote had selected eight judges for the constitutional bench (CB) of the SC. The judge, who was number 9 on the seniority list of the Sindh High Court, was nominated as head of the CB.
Akhtar Hussain had supported all these JCP decisions, which badly damaged the independence of the judiciary. PTI lawmakers and two senior Supreme Court judges had boycotted the February 10 JCP meeting, raising questions about its transparency.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
16 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Azma accuses PTI of pursuing well-planned ‘coercive strategy'
LAHORE: It is well rehearsed strategy of PTI to coerce their political opponents as well as state machinery through abuse, allegations, claiming victimhood and outright lies. Back in 2023, they would call any arrest of their leaders or workers by police as 'Abduction'. This is a classic example of narrative manipulation. Despite being champions of accountability before and during their tenure in power, PTI after losing power labels any action by law enforcement agencies as persecution. PTI leaders and supporters have been incessantly speaking lies about IK's legal cases and his imprisonment. Facts are completely opposite to what PTI wants world to believe. All cases have been registered as per law and despite delaying tactics of defence team of IK, enough leeway was granted by trial courts. Defence has not been able to refute authenticity of the cases, rather they have relied on fine points of procedure coupled with delaying tactics. IK & Bushra Bibi remained direct beneficiaries of misappropriation. Either be it Toshakhana Cases or 190 million pounds case, both husband and wife drew financial gains. In all cases where IK or Bushra Bibi were convicted they availed right of appeal and duly benefited from it. In number of cases verdict was overturned or sentence was suspended. The man who while in power used to arrogantly announce that he would remove AC from prison cell of his political opponents, is himself enjoying unprecedented facilities in jail. He has been given a complex comprising seven cells with a corridor for walk. He has also got an exercise cycle, TV, newspaper and books to read. All never known to other prisoners who are authorized Class B jail. IK remains abreast with current affairs and gives directions to his party accordingly. His X handle regularly posts his remarks. Since his imprisonment, IK has tweeted 413 times. He has delivered messages to party workers through his X account on all major political developments like General Elections 2024, Bye Elections in Sambrial, PTI protest in Islamabad on 26 Nov 2024, dialogue with government or enactment of 26th Constitutional Amendment. IK's statements regularly make headlines in domestic print media like, his denouncement of budget published in The News on 11 Jun 25, comments on India – Pakistan war published in Dawn on 14 May 25 or rejection of ISPR statement published in Express Tribune on 31 Dec 24. In less than past 12 months i.e period from Aug 2024 till to date, IK's statements have made headlines on 45 occasions. IK has been giving interviews to international media as well, unprecedented for a convict. Since 2024, IK has had at least ten interactions with international media including Fox News, WSJ, ITV, Reuters, The Telegraph and others. IK also frequently shuffles his party leadership. Most of it can be ascribed to almost unrestricted access of party leaders to him, who frequently lobby against each other. In previous three months 66 x people met IK including party leaders, family members and lawyers. He has been also making calls to his two sons in UK. However, insiders have revealed that on many occasions they have refused to take his call citing other priority commitments. Claims that IK is being politically victimized have no solid basis. These are deliberate attempts to turn legal accountability into political drama to weaken public trust in the justice system. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
18 hours ago
- Business Recorder
SC rules coercive tax recovery not allowed without due notice
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court held that Section 140 of the Tax Ordinance, 2001 does not permit immediate coercive recovery in the absence of a date set in the notice. 'Section 140 of the Ordinance expressly provides that the party holding money on behalf of the taxpayer must be afforded a notice with a due date to discharge its liability,' said a judgment, authored by Justice Ayesha. A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Munib Akhtar and comprising Justice Ayesha A Malik and Justice Shahid, on Monday, delivered a judgment. Justice Shahid found reasons of Justice Ayesha meticulously articulated with clarity and precision, but to further enhance the understanding of these reasons, wrote his additional note. Amendments to orders for accuracy: Commissioner IR has powers under Sec 221(1) of IT law: SC The judgment said the section requires the Commissioner to set a date in the notice for recovery purposes, hence, the requirement of the Rule 210 C (3) of the Income Tax Recovery Rules, 2002 for immediate recovery is against the scheme of Section 140 of the Ordinance, adding 'Rule 210C is contrary to the requirements of Section 140 of the Ordinance.' The judgment further stated; 'It is settled law that rules are subordinate or delegated legislation, framed under a statute and, therefore, subservient to the statute itself and must yield where there is any inconsistency.' The Court observed that the language of Section 140 of the Ordinance does not envisage immediate or mechanical recovery rather the provision contemplates that the Commissioner will issue notice and will give a reasonable timeframe for the purpose of recovery. 'The requirement of notice before recovery is not merely statutory but reflects the broader guarantees of due process and fair trial under Article 10A of the Constitution, as well as the right to dignity under Article 14.' The judgment said that the courts have consistently upheld that even in fiscal matters, recovery must be carried out in a manner that respects the individual's dignity and legal safeguards. 'Consequently, even where the law allows coercive recovery, it must be carried out in a way that preserves the dignity of the taxpayer.' The Respondent in CPLA No.3578 of 2024 is Pakistan LNG Limited whose income tax return for the year 2020 was amended in terms of order dated 15.03.2021 under Section 122(5A) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, raising a demand of Rs2,928,517,260 for recovery of tax due. On the same date, notice under Section 137(2) of the Ordinance was issued informing the taxpayer of the amount due. The Respondent challenged the amended assessment order before the Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) (CIR Appeals) which appeal was decided on 09.03.2022 and subsequently uploaded on the web portal of the FBR (i.e., IRIS) at 3:28 pm. On the same date, at 4:00 pm, notice under Section 140 of the Ordinance was issued for immediate recovery in terms thereof. The Respondent in CPLA No.4598 of 2024 is Serene Air Private Limited who is a withholding agent and who statedly did not fulfill its obligations for the tax year 2020. Resultantly, proceedings in terms of Section 161 read with Section 205 of the Ordinance were decided on 31.03.2022. On the same date, notices under Section 137(2) of the Ordinance were issued raising a demand of Rs1,883,917,790 for recovery of withholding tax. The respondent filed an appeal before the CIR Appeals which was decided on 11.05.2023 at 1:56 pm. On the same date, notices under Section 140 of the Ordinance were issued to the banks for immediate recovery at 10:30 pm. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
21 hours ago
- Express Tribune
'No concept of judges' permanent transfer'
The Karachi Bar Association and PTI leader Shoaib Shaheen Advocate have challenged the Supreme Court's order in a case related to transfer of judges to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) and a subsequent change in the IHC judges' seniority list. The petitioners have contended that the June 20 verdict of a constitutional bench of the SC has misinterpreted the Constitution and wrongly inferred the concept of a permanent transfer from the Article 200 of the Constitution. Article 200 of the Constitution deals with the transfer of high court judges. It outlines the process for transferring a judge from one high court to another. According to the article, the president can transfer a judge, but only with their consent and after consultation with the chief justice of Pakistan and the chief justices of both high courts involved. The petitioners have contended there is no provision of a permanent transfer of a superior court judge in the Constitution and only the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) is entitled to fill vacant positions in high courts and the apex court. The petitions also argue that the president also does not have the authority to determine seniority of judges and urged the SC to revisit its order and declare it null and void. In a majority verdict, an SC constitutional bench on June 20 upheld the transfer of three provincial high court judges to the IHC, noting that these transfers could not be declared new appointments. However, the majority judges partially remanded the matter to the President of Pakistan to determine the seniority of the transferred judges after examining and vetting their service record "as soon as possible, including the question of whether the transfer is on a permanent or temporary basis". Later on June 29, President Asif Ali Zardari named Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar as the senior-most judge of the IHC, following a determination of judicial seniority.
