LHC Judge appointments spark Rawalpindi lawyers’ uproar, calls for transparency and review

Rawalpindi: A dispute has erupted among lawyers’ groups in Rawalpindi over recent appointments and nominations of judges to the Lahore High Court, with some bar organisations raising questions over the representation of Rawalpindi Division and demanding a review of the process.

The controversy intensified after the Peoples Lawyers Forum Rawalpindi Division called the proposed nominations unacceptable and demanded that the Judicial Commission examine the reasons behind the selections and the rejection of other candidates.

The forum questioned why no candidate from Rawalpindi Division was included in the nominations and demanded details about the criteria used for selecting nominees.

Meanwhile, the High Court Bar Association Rawalpindi and District Bar Association Rawalpindi also expressed concern over what they described as the continued lack of representation of Rawalpindi Division in Lahore High Court appointments.

The District Bar Association Rawalpindi stated that ignoring the region’s experienced lawyers raised concerns about merit, transparency and regional balance.

The association said Rawalpindi Division has a large legal community consisting of seven district bars and fourteen tehsil bars, producing many renowned lawyers, judges and legal professionals who have contributed to Pakistan’s judicial system.

According to the association, no member of the Rawalpindi Division bar has been confirmed as a Lahore High Court judge since 2017, despite several capable lawyers and additional judges from the region having served with distinction.

The High Court Bar Association Rawalpindi described the continued absence of representation as a matter requiring attention and said consultations would be held with district and tehsil bars to decide future steps.

The Peoples Lawyers Forum also called on President Asif Ali Zardari and Peoples Lawyers Forum President Nayyar Hussain Bukhari to take notice of the situation.

The forum requested that the notification process should be reviewed and that the Judicial Commission should provide details about the nominated candidates, their qualifications, selection reasons and the reasons why other candidates were not considered.

The lawyers’ group demanded that if the process was found inconsistent with rules or principles of fairness, recommendations should be reconsidered and a fresh merit based review should be conducted.

However, the dispute remains focused on questions of representation and transparency rather than any confirmed wrongdoing. The final decision regarding judicial appointments rests with the relevant constitutional authorities and judicial forums.

The issue has now placed attention on the balance between merit based appointments and regional representation in the higher judiciary.

Lawyers’ organisations have called for a transparent mechanism that ensures qualified candidates from all regions receive equal consideration while maintaining the independence and quality of the judicial system.