In the past, governments have taken arbitrary decisions invoking wider national interest with the result that whenever any term of the sort is used to justify an act one tends to be over-cautious. According to a Supreme Court announcement, CJ Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry proposed to request Justice Khalil Ramday and Justice Rahmat Hussain Jafferi to rejoin the bench as ad hoc judges which was unanimously agreed on by the full bench of the SC. Both the judges, the announcement said, had accepted the proposal in wider institutional interest. Thus, Justice Ramday who is retiring on February 17 after completing a one-year tenure is to be given a rare second extension as ad hoc judge and Justice (r) Rehmat Hussain Jafferi, who retired on November 22, 2010 would be inducted as another ad hoc judge. The proposal for reappointment has come at a time when the SC has declared the re-employment of retired officers on contract as illegal, leading seven officers of the category to resign in Punjab and 13 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. A similar process is underway in other provinces and at the center. The SC has given Thursday as the deadline to remove other retired officials presently working on contract.
An argument given by the SC against the re-employment was that the contractual employees block the way of other officers waiting for their turn. Where would the youth go? it was rhetorically asked. This is a fairly convincing argument but then what is good for the goose should also be good for the gander. The principle has to be applied universally without exception. True, though the technically, Justice Ramdays extension is not unconstitutional, is goes against the spirit of the apex courts directive on extensions of civil servants. Justice Ramday has completed his tenure and any reasons given extensive experience, impeccable judgment or integrity irrespective of its merit would be as immaterial as similar arguments given to support the re-appointment of retired government officials. Justice Ramday had in fact himself observed while hearing the Hajj corruption case that no person should be re-employed after retirement.
The proposal has drawn objections from the Punjab Bar Association and Supreme Court Bar Association indicating a division among the legal community over the issue. Both these organisations played a key role in the lawyers movement and this is the first time that the two important organisations have taken strong exception to a position taken by the SC. There is a need on the part of the apex court to give a second thought to its proposal.
