Islamabad: Members of the Pakistan Judicial Commission (JCP) Subcommittee have forwarded several proposals rule Evaluate and set standards for the High Court judges.
The subcommittee led by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail on Friday went to Pakistan Attorney General (AGP) man Out Usman Awan, representative of Pakistan Bar Association (PBC) Muhammad Ahsan Bhoon, Senator Farooq H. Naek Senator Farooq H.
The JCP Subcommittee decided to merge and make each recommendation among all members for discussion at the next meeting and planned for the next week, and postponed exploration and learned the thorough discussion. Performance of the current judge of the High Court.
One of the proposals is to consider the time period for a High Court judge to hold a judgment after the judgment is retained, as the super delay ultimately frustrates the litigant.
Members make suggestions and discuss them next week
The committee also recommends that the High Court judge announce the verdict within three months for the 2015 Hero MFMY Industries Ltd case, by three judges in the Supreme Court case.
The Supreme Court was chaired by Justice Saqib Nisar, and the hero of his ruling was that the reasonable time for the judgment should be 90 days, because the elaboration of the law requires a lot of research, reflection and deliberation.
It is pointed out that ninety days should be enough to form a judgment. If a judge is unable to resign during this time, they must record sufficient reasons and can order the case for rehearsal.
Numbers or cases
Another recommendation under consideration is that the JCP evaluates how many cases a judge decides within a month and whether these decisions involve substantive matters to improve jurisprudence or only routine bail matters.
The proposals also include assessing whether the judges exhausted the entire list of reasons on the day or simply hearing some cases and representing the rest.
However, after the judge pointed out the jurisdictional flaw, the question of how the benchmark explains how the benchmark will interpret the case remains. A legal expert noted that such withdrawals save judicial time by avoiding unnecessary apartments, but have never been reported in the legal summary. “Would the judge be punished for thoroughly understanding the case and withdrawing the withdrawal?” asked the expert.
Experts further explained that performance cannot be simply measured by the number of cases heard in a day, as it depends largely on the type of cases assigned by the Chief Justice. For example, civil amendment cases are time-consuming and complex, and other categories may involve giving instructions to departments and can be determined with more caution. He believes it is unfair to compare judges of this type of case.
On June 19, the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi formed the extensive High Court Judicial Performance Evaluation Committee. The committee consists of members of the Judicial, Parliament, Executive and Legal Brotherhood, and is tasked with preparing drafts for the annual judicial performance evaluation and developing criteria for selecting judges.
this Amendment 26 Article 175A allows the JCP to give time for underperforming High Court judges to improve, and if they fail, advise them to remove them from the Supreme Judicial Committee (SJC).
After the entire period of such approval, the judge’s performance was once again found to be inefficient. The Commission will send a report to the Supreme Judicial Committee (SJC) and recommends dismissal.
In addition, the Commission will conduct annual assessments of High Court judges and may develop rules to define performance standards.
Posted at Dawn on September 27, 2025
