Islamabad High Court Demands Federal Government Explain Delayed High Court Judge Appointments, Holds Petitioner’s Challenge Pending.

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday told the federal government it must first explain the status of a long‑pending summary before the court can decide whether a petition challenging President Asif Ali Zardari’s inaction is maintainable. Advocate Luqman Zafar Chaudhry, represented by counsel Zahid Asif Chaudhry, filed the petition. It accuses the president of holding a summary—sent by the prime minister after recommendations from the Judicial Commission of Pakistan for appointments to the Islamabad, Lahore, Sindh and Balochistan high courts—without giving assent, returning it, or providing any legal justification. The petitioner said that such indefinite silence is not allowed by the constitution and that the delay has worsened the shortage of judges in superior courts. The petition asks the president to disclose when the summary was received, explain the reason for the delay, and instruct him, via his secretary, to approve the summary immediately. During the hearing, Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir repeatedly asked whether a constitutional writ could be issued against the president and urged counsel to cite a precedent in which a court had directed the head of state to perform a constitutional duty. Counsel argued that the president’s role is ceremonial and that no discretion exists beyond granting approval. The bench also sought clarity on who is empowered to issue the appointments notification. Counsel mentioned that normally the Ministry of Law issues the notification after the president’s approval, but noted that more than 15 days have elapsed. Consequently, counsel claimed that the competent authority should issue the notification if the president has failed to act. Advocate Chaudhry added that reports indicated the government might issue the appointments notification within the next 48 hours, urging the court to ask the government for the status of the summary. The court’s questions highlight the ongoing dispute over the process for appointing high court judges and the government's role in that process.