JCP confirms 11 additional judges as permanent members of Lahore High Court

ISLAMABAD: The Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) on Thursday recommended the confirmation of 11 additional judges of the Lahore High Court (LHC) as permanent judges, while extending the tenure of one judge for six months and declining to confirm another, as part of its ongoing review of judicial appointments across the country.

The meeting of the commission was presided over by Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi and held at the Supreme Court, according to a press release issued by the apex court. The commission considered a total list of 13 additional judges of the LHC.

After examining the relevant data forms, antecedents and evaluation material placed before it, the JCP, by a majority, approved the confirmation of Justices Hassan Nawaz Makhdoom, Malik Waqar Haider Awan, Sardar Akbar Ali, Syed Ahsan Raza Kazmi, Malik Javid Iqbal Wains, Muhammad Jawad Zafar, Khalid Ishaq, Malik Muhammad Awais Khalid, Chaudhry Sultan Mahmood, Tanveer Ahmad Sheikh and Abher Gul Khan.

The commission also recommended, by a majority, a six-month extension for Additional Judge Tariq Mahmood Bajwa. However, Additional Judge Raja Ghazanfar Ali Khan was not confirmed, the press release said, without providing further details.

The decision on LHC judges comes amid a broader exercise by the JCP this week to regularise judicial appointments across the country. In separate meetings, the commission has already recommended the confirmation of three additional judges of the Islamabad High Court (IHC), 10 of the Sindh High Court, six of the Peshawar High Court and one of the Balochistan High Court.

Notably, the confirmation of three IHC additional judges — Muhammad Azam Khan, Muhammad Asif and Inaam Ameen Minhas — was approved despite reservations raised by JCP member and senior puisne judge of the IHC, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, who had questioned the competence of his colleagues in a written communication to the commission.

The latest decisions reflect the JCP’s continued effort to fill long-standing vacancies in the superior judiciary and ensure institutional continuity, even as some confirmations have sparked debate within judicial circles over evaluation criteria and transparency in the appointment process.