Pakistan's top judge rejects call to make JCP proceedings public
In the Nov.25, 2024 meeting, senior puisne judge Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah had proposed that the minutes of JCP meetings be made public, but the idea was turned down by a majority of members, a well-placed source revealed.
On June 25, Justice Shah again urged the JCP to share minutes of its meetings - citing past transparency measures taken during the tenure of former CJP Justice Qazi Faez Isa, when the minutes of a three-judge committee formed under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 were regularly uploaded on the Supreme Court's official website.
The Nov 25 JCP meeting had been convened to constitute a nine-judge constitutional bench for the Sindh High Court (SHC), which was approved by a majority vote of 11 to 4. However, PTI representatives - Leader of the Opposition in National Assembly Omar Ayub and Leader of the Opposition in Senate Shibli Faraz, - did not attend the meeting.
The JCP waited for nearly two hours for the two members to arrive, but their mobile phones remained switched off. The JCP then proceeded with its meeting. Later, PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan and Senator Barrister Syed Ali Zafar were nominated to replace Omar Ayub and Shibli Faraz in the JCP.
During the session, chaired by CJP Yahya Afridi, Justice Shah invoked Article 19A of the Constitution to argue that the proceedings of the commission should be made public due to the significant public interest involved in its decisions. He emphasised that transparency in judicial appointments was essential to uphold democratic norms and public trust.
Law Minister Azam Nazir Tarar responded that the decision should be based on the collective wisdom of the commission's members.
The attorney general of Pakistan noted that the in-camera nature of JCP meetings was prescribed by the commission's rules of 2010 and that any deviation would require a formal amendment to those rules.
The CJP clarified the current legal framework did not allow disclosure of proceedings, as the existing rules explicitly prohibit it. Nevertheless, he put the matter to a vote. The proposal was rejected, with 11 members voting against it and only three - including Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Munib Akhtar - voting in favour. SHC Chief Justice Shafi Siddiqui abstained.
Tariq Butt
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Filipino Times
18 hours ago
- Filipino Times
DOJ to launch Taal Lake search for missing sabungeros this week
Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin 'Boying' Remulla said the government is pushing to begin the search for the bodies of the missing sabungeros or cockfighting enthusiasts in Taal Lake within the week. Remulla said the operation would initially focus on a fishpond lease by one of the suspects. 'We're asking them to start this week. Our basic plan is to map it out and assess the condition so we can plan how to go about it,' he said. He did not specify which agency would lead the operation, but the secretary earlier said the Philippine Coast Guard and Philippine Navy could be tapped for technical diving operations. The search follows whistleblower Julie 'Dondon' Patidongan's claim that the bodies of the missing individuals were dumped in the lake. Remulla added that he is still waiting for a response from the Japanese government after seeking their assistance last week. Patidongan named businessman Atong Ang as the mastermind in the case. He also linked actress Gretchen Barretto to the disappearances.
Zawya
a day ago
- Zawya
South Africa: Justice Committee Chairperson Says Justice Prevails in Sindiso Magaqa Murder Case
The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, Mr Xola Nqola, welcomed the sentence of long-term imprisonment for the man who was found guilty of murdering ANCYL secretary-general Mr Sindiso Magaqa, a former ANC Youth League Secretary-General and dedicated public servant. Mr Nqola said the conviction and the 25-year sentence mark a significant moment for the rule of law in South Africa and reinforces our collective belief that justice must be served — regardless of time, influence or status. Mr Ncengwa admitted that he was one of a group of men who were paid R120 000 to kill Mr Magaqa in 2017. Mr Ncengwa also implicated in the crime former city manager of the Umzimkhulu municipality Mr Zweliphansi Skhosana; the ex-mayor, Mr Mluleki Ndobe, who has since passed on, and former journalist and eThekwini municipality communications manager Mr Mdu Ncalane. Mr Magaqa was a passionate advocate for youth empowerment and integrity in public service. His untimely death was not only a loss to his family and community but to the nation. Mr Nqola said the committee commends the investigative and prosecutorial teams for their persistence in pursuing this complex case and hopes that this outcome brings some measure of closure to Mr Magaqa's loved ones. 'We urge continued support for law enforcement and the judiciary in their efforts to address politically motivated crimes and protect all who serve the public. South Africa's democracy depends on the assurance that no one is above the law,' Mr Nqola said. Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Republic of South Africa: The Parliament.
Zawya
a day ago
- Zawya
The Verdict is in and Greenpeace Won't Accept Justice
Environmental hate group Greenpeace has once again launched an attack on the African Energy Chamber ( and Africa's energy sector, citing the continent's efforts to accelerate development as a coordinated attack on the right to dissent. Using the example whereby a jury in North Dakota issued a landmark ruling, ordering Greenpeace to pay $660 million in damages for malicious interference with the Dakota Access Pipeline, the organization has declared that companies such as the African Energy Chamber (AEC) utilize Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation - SLAPP suits - to intimidate and silence critics. Let us be clear: lawsuits like the example above are not tactical weapons to intimidate: it is a clear example of justice being served to organizations attempting to dismantle global development and community empowerment. The examples shared by Greenpeace are not 'corporate weaponization of the law to dismantle civil society opposition' - it is a clear example of justice. Greenpeace has proven time and time again that it does not in fact care about people; it operates under a mandate to attack the energy industry. The AEC has been consistent in its calls, advocating for justice, inclusive development and equitable investments. On the other hand, Greenpeace has been consistent in its attacks, targeting projects that stand to make a difference in the world. As we have said before, the organization's methods go beyond protesting – they involve a calculated strategy of misinformation, disruption and direct interference with energy infrastructure. When faced with the consequences of their actions – in this case, $$660 million worth – the organization blames investors, they blame the justice system and they blame the energy sector. Africa is so close to unlocking significant economic development. With 125 billion barrels of crude oil, 620 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and abundant renewable energy potential, the continent is working hard to bring tangible benefits to its communities. Africa is not pursuing ambitious projects with the aim of exporting. Africa is accelerating development with the aim of creating greater value from its oil and gas resources – resources that western nations have long-benefited from. Organizations such as Greenpeace claim to stand on behalf of 'concerned citizens,' yet they so carefully ignore the very citizens set to benefit from Africa's oil and gas resources. We have said it time and time again, with over 600 million people living without access to electricity and over 900 million people living without access to clean cooking solutions, Africa cannot afford to leave these resources in the ground. This very statistic has led the citizens of Africa – not only corporations – to rally behind the call to 'make energy poverty history.' And it is large-scale oil and gas projects that will achieve this goal. From Namibia's Orange Basin to Libya's Sirte to Angola's Kwanza and Mozambique's Rovuma, Africa's oil and gas basins will transform the continent. Major investments stand to do more than extract resources, they create jobs, develop infrastructure, boost skills development and give hope to millions of Africans. These projects are being developed in close coordination with environmental groups. Take the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), a vital infrastructure project set to connect Uganda's oilfields with Tanzania's Port of Tanga. EACOP developer TotalEnergies has placed environmental protection and community engagement at the very heart of development. The project is being developed through specialized measures geared towards protecting the environment as well as the rights of local communities. Environmental and Social Impact Assessments were carried out in compliance with the standards of the International Finance Corporation, third-party reviews were conducted, regular engagement with impact communities is deployed. Right from the design phase of these projects, special attention has been paid to information, consultation and consensus-building with all stakeholders. Over 70,000 people were consulted for the ESIAs and more than 20,000 meetings have been held to date with the populations concerned and civil society organizations. The project is an example of how oil companies are in fact working in close partnership with environmental authorities. Greenpeace's attacks on the industry go beyond infrastructure. The organization strongly opposes oil and gas exploration, disrupting seismic data acquisition and drilling. Campaigns have been launched against Shell in South Africa, and as a result, the country has been unable to understand the wealth of resources it has offshore. Greenpeace is seeking donations to support its efforts to block development in South Africa, calling 'To Hell with Shell.' Similarly, the organization is opposing Africa Oil Corp as it strives to unlock new development opportunities in South Africa. Greenpeace is appealing an Environmental Authorization received by Africa Oil Corp to conduct exploration. In Mozambique, Greenpeace has called for investors to stop financing vital projects, including major LNG developments that could transform southern Africa into an energy hub. By accosting funders, they have impacted developments in the Rovuma basin, leaving millions in energy poverty without a second thought. But the question is, why Africa? Greenpeace are fiercely opposing African exploration efforts but ignoring projects in other regions such as the Middle East. This is an intentional attack on the continent. Greenpeace is right. The lawsuit against it is not an isolated event – it is a demonstration of how Greenpeace continues to blame others for the damages it causes. Organizations such as the AEC have tried again and again to work with environmental groups, but they are not interested in partnerships. They only want disruption. Sustainable development is about people, it is about inclusivity and it is about democracy. We should ask ourselves: will we allow environmental groups to dictate what Africa deserves? Will we allow these groups to attack projects, prevent growth and disrupt the livelihoods of people? Or will be make energy poverty history and transform the lives of African people? Distributed by APO Group on behalf of African Energy Chamber.
