August 6, 2026
By Hashir Ahsan
ISLAMABAD:
The Islamabad High Court has kept its decision reserved on whether a petition can be heard. The petition was filed against the President for not approving the summary on judges’ appointments.
The case was heard by Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir.
Advocate Zahid Asif Chaudhry appeared on behalf of the person who filed the petition, advocate Luqman Zafar.
Zahid Asif Chaudhry said the Judicial Commission meeting was held on July 20 and 21, and it made its recommendation there. He said 15 days have now passed, and that according to his information the government is about to issue the notification. He asked the court to call for information on this.
On the court’s order, the request in the petition was read out. The court asked whether such a petition can be issued against the president of Pakistan. The lawyer said that after the president’s approval, the law ministry usually issues the notification, but the law ministry can also issue the notification without the president’s approval. The court remarked that the case being referred to did not involve a similar situation.
The lawyer argued that the summary for approval of judges’ appointments was sent to the president of Pakistan, and that there are reports the government is about to issue the notification for the judges’ appointment. He asked the court to seek details of this summary. The court asked whether this request was made in the petition, and the lawyer said yes, it was.
The court asked him to show a judgment in which directions were given to the president, and asked which authority is responsible for issuing the notification. The lawyer said a judgment exists in which directions were given to a parliamentary committee. The court again asked him to show a judgment where the president himself was given directions, and asked him to give any example where a writ was issued against the president.
The lawyer asked if the court had seen any judgment about Article 48 of the constitution, and asked whether approving the summary is a discretionary power. The court again asked him to show any judgment of any court where the president was given a direction. The lawyer said the nomination of judges is sent by the prime minister to the president for appointment, and that the president’s office is a ceremonial one. The court again asked him to show a court judgment on this point.
The lawyer said his request is that fifteen days have passed, and if the president does not give approval, then the relevant authority should issue the notification. He said the president has no power other than to approve. The court asked him again which authority is the competent one. The lawyer said the law ministry issues the notification, and requested that the court ask the federal government, the prime minister’s office and the law ministry for their response, and ask them what the status of the summary is.
The court asked him directly whether a writ can be issued against the president. The lawyer said he is only asking that the government be asked first, and that there are reports the government will issue the judges’ appointment notification within 48 hours. After this the court reserved its decision on whether the petition is fit to be heard.
The petition filed in the Islamabad High Court asks that the president be ordered to approve the confirmation of additional judges who are already serving in the higher judiciary. Advocate Luqman Zafar Chaudhry filed the petition on Wednesday through his lawyer Zahid Asif Chaudhry. It challenges the delay by President Asif Ali Zardari in approving the summary sent to him by the prime minister. The summary includes recommendations for appointing new judges and for confirming additional judges already working in the high courts.
The petition says that the Judicial Commission of Pakistan, headed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan, completed the constitutional process and approved the recommendations for judges’ appointments on July 20 and 21. After that the prime minister sent the summary to the president under Article 48 of the constitution. The petition says the president has so far neither approved the summary nor sent it back, but has held it without any constitutional reason. It says the constitution gives the president only a limited role in the appointment of judges.
The oath taking ceremony for the recommended judges was supposed to take place on July 27, but because the president did not approve the summary, the ceremony could not be held and has now been postponed indefinitely.
The petition says Article 48 of the constitution requires the president to act on the prime minister’s advice, and that the only situation where the president can send the advice back is for reconsideration, and that too within 15 days. It says the constitution gives no room for staying silent or delaying the decision for an unlimited time. It says that by holding back the summary, the president is turning a limited, time bound constitutional duty into a kind of veto power or into an unlimited delay, which goes against the principle of judicial independence.
The petition refers to earlier Supreme Court judgments saying that the process of appointing judges should be transparent, based on mutual consultation, and completed within the fixed time, without unnecessary interference from the administration. It says the shortage of judges in the higher judiciary is affecting the delivery of justice, causing delay in the decisions of cases, and affecting the basic rights of citizens.
The petition asks the court to order the president to approve the summary immediately, and to declare it unlawful that no action was taken even though the 15 day constitutional period has passed. It also asks the court to seek an explanation from the president’s office about when the summary was received and what the reasons for the delay are.