Appointment of judges

Appointment of the judges would be on the basis of merit and no recommendation should carry any weightage whatsoever. Judges should not feel obliged to the appointing authority. Some people advocate that the judges should be appointed through election by the people as legislatures are elected. This method has some inherent defects. In such an election political parties are bound to play a significant role. The elected judges would try to remain faithful to the party that helped in their winning the election. People in general are not wise enough to judge the qualities of a person. Judges will do all right and wrong deed to get reelected. Lastly, to get elected they would employ all corrupt methods like ordinary law makers. Garner says, “Election lowers the character of the judiciary, tends to make a politician of the judge and subjects the judicial mind to strain which it is not always able to resist.” Similarly, if the appointment of judges is made by the legislature even then they will not be free to act independently. They will remain under the obligation of one political party or the other. Appointment by the executive is the most satisfactory method for the choice of the judges. The executive appoints only trained and skilled lawyers to the post of judges. Moreover, merit being the sole criterion in appointing the judges; it prompts the judges to be impartial and free of any bias. Though political considerations do play some part but that is not damaging.

A fixed and a reasonably long period of tenure will guarantee impartiality, If tenure is short the judges may adopt wrong methods to please the executive for reappointment. The power of removing a judge should not be concentrated in the hands of a single person. In Pakistan removing judges of High Court and Supreme Court is very complex phenomenon.