Islamabad, August 10, 2026: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday issued notices to the President and Prime Minister through their respective secretaries over a pending summary concerning the appointment of judges to the high courts, questioning the delay in completing the constitutional process.
Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir issued the notices while hearing a writ petition challenging the President’s failure to approve the summary and directed the respondents to submit their responses by Wednesday.
During the proceedings, the judge questioned Additional Attorney General Rashid Hafeez about the federal government’s handling of the matter and sought details regarding the current status of the summary.
“It appears the federal government has little interest in the matter. We thought the federal government would fulfil its responsibility, but that has not happened,” Justice Tahir remarked.
The court also asked whether the government was aware of the stage at which the summary was pending and questioned the delay in appointments to the superior judiciary.
Justice Tahir observed that the confirmations of judges for the Sindh High Court (SHC) and Peshawar High Court (PHC), whose nominations had been approved by the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP), had also stalled.
The judge noted that more than 18 days had passed since the summary was forwarded.
During the hearing, petitioner’s counsel Zahid Asif Chaudhry argued that the Constitution clearly prescribes the procedure and consequences once the stipulated period expires. He maintained that the President could not keep the summary pending indefinitely.
Additional Attorney General Rashid Hafeez, however, submitted that the President could no longer reject the summary at this stage.
The proceedings originated from a public-interest writ petition filed by advocate Luqman Zafar, who contended that the JCP had nominated candidates for appointment as high court judges during meetings held on July 20 and 21.
According to the petition, the nominations were transmitted to the President through the Prime Minister under Article 175A(8) of the Constitution, but no decision had been taken despite the passage of the prescribed period.
The petitioner’s counsel further argued that the Constitution allows the President to return advice for reconsideration within 15 days, but claimed that the constitutional period had expired without the advice being either acted upon or returned.
In a three-page written order issued following the hearing, the IHC sought reports from the federal government and the Ministry of Law explaining the status of the summary.
The court directed the Deputy Attorney General to ensure that the federal government and the Law Ministry submit concise written reports specifying the date on which the Prime Minister forwarded the summary to the President and whether any action was taken thereafter.
Justice Tahir also directed the respondents to explain the constitutional consequences if advice concerning the appointment of judges remains pending indefinitely without being acted upon or returned within the period prescribed by the Constitution.
The case will be taken up again on Wednesday.
