Is the Chief Justice Acting on His Own?

In a country where politics can get very personal, the Chief Justice’s relationships with the pillars of civilian and military power, President Zardari and Army Chief of Staff General Ashfaq Kayani respectively, could be important in shaping Pakistan’s transition from de facto military rule to civilian democracy. 

And those relationships are likely to be tested in the tussle over a package of wide-ranging constitutional reforms that was due to be introduced to parliament, whose purpose is to reverse changes made by previous military rulers, trim the power of the presidency, and alter the procedure for Supreme Court appointments. The bill would take Supreme Court appointments out of the hands of the president, who now makes nominations after consulting with the chief justice, and place them before a government legal committee that also includes several justices. 

The proposed reforms have widened the rift between Chaudhry and the government that has grown since the Chief Justice in 2009 struck down amnesty decrees by Musharraf that protected many senior figures in government — including Zardari himself once out of office — from prosecution on corruption charges. And some saw the Chief Justice’s hand in the eleventh-hour stalling of parliamentary debate on the constitutional package by opposition leader Nawaz Sharif, who objected to proposals on the selection of judges. Sharif’s opposition, some senior politicians suggest, results from being pressured by Chaudhry, who is allegedly opposed to having his own power in the selection of judges curtailed. “The chief justice threatened [Sharif]. He said he’d open up all cases against him,” a senior leader of the ruling Pakistan People’s Party said on condition of anonymity. “He’s become an absolute dictator.” 

On the contrary, says a legal expert at the Supreme Court and Chaudhry associate speaking on condition of anonymity, the conflict is caused by the “government wanting a chief justice and court which is compliant, not independent.” 

The standoff over how judges are selected could have far-reaching implications in a political order feeling its way towards democracy, with the different branches of government are attempting to first stretch the bounds of their authority and second, to learn how to work with each other. The problem in Pakistan has historically been with the military’s intervention, transitions have been disrupted, and the judiciary in the past has supported every military intervention. 

But as the two civilian branches of government tussle over their powers, neither appears to have clear backing from the military, whose preferences are often decisive. Still, some Pakistani media commentators suggest that the generals may be colluding with the judges to limit the power of government, already groaning under the weight of the president’s sagging popularity. They point to a stalled but soon-to-be-reopened Supreme Court case that accuses intelligence agencies of using the “war on terror” as a pretext to secretly detain thousands of citizens suspected of links to Baluchi separatists and other radical groups. Supreme Court Justice Javed Iqbal in the case recently said that the court “would not like to create the impression that it was out to destroy or tarnish the image of intelligence agencies” with regard to these cases. 

Chaudhry had in 2007 begun to investigate the issue of Pakistanis alleged to have disappeared into secret custody before he was deposed by Musharraf, and had ordered members of the security forces to produce several of the missing in court. Now, some media commentators are suggesting that Chaudhry is retreating from that fight. Chaudhry’s supporters deny the claim, and say that the court will not shy away from prosecuting any security officials who have broken the law. 

Whatever the outcome of the particular battles over constitutional powers and various court cases, what remains clear is that Justice Chaudhry, while holding an office that is ostensibly above politics, will remain in the thick of it.

Chief Justice Pakistan Getting Rs 260,000 Per Month

On March 9, 2010, President Zardari approved a 30 percent increase in the salary and allowances of judges of the Supreme Court and high courts.

Under the revised pay structure, the Chief Justice of Pakistan has been given an increase of Rs60,000 per month (30 percent increase). His salary will now be Rs259,838 against his previous salary of Rs199,838 per month.

Other judges of the Supreme Court will each get a salary of Rs245,457 per month against their earlier salary of Rs188,813 per month.

The chief justices of all high courts will get Rs240,825 per month instead of Rs185,250 while high court judges would now fetch a salary of Rs231,563 per month as against Rs178,125 they earlier drew.

Apart from the salary, the judicial allowance of the judges of the Supreme Court and high courts has also been increased and the chief justice and judges of the Supreme Court would now be taking a judicial allowance of Rs113,750 per month as against Rs87,500 per month.

Similarly, the chief justice and judges of high courts will now get Rs91,000 as against Rs70,000 after the increase in their judicial allowance.

The increase in salary and allowances of the judges shall come into force with retrospective effect from July 1, 2009.

The salary and allowances are allowed to judges of the Supreme Court under paras 1 and 2 of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution (Supreme Court part) while the salary and allowances of the judges of high courts are allowed under paras 1 & 2 of the Fifth schedule (High Court part) to the Constitution.

Judges of the Supreme Court and high courts did not avail the increase last year when the government had announced the overall increase in salaries of the government employees.

The increase in salaries of the judges had required a summary from the law ministry, which was moved to the president for approval after a lapse of eight months.

Under the provision of the fifth schedule to the Constitution, the president announces salaries and allowances of the judges of the Supreme Court and high courts through a presidential order.