FCC bars arbitrary public offices appointments
The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has ruled that appointments to important public offices must demonstrably conform to constitutional standards of fairness, transparency, institutional integrity and merit-based governance, holding that executive authority cannot be exercised on undisclosed considerations or in disregard of established selection procedures.
Upholding a Peshawar High Court (PHC) judgment that set aside the appointment of the petitioner as chairman of the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education (BISE), Bannu, the FCC stressed that the legitimacy of public administration depends not merely on the existence of power but on its transparent and disciplined exercise in accordance with the law.
A twelve-page judgement authored by Justice Rozi Khan Barrech stated that public authority cannot be exercised on undisclosed considerations, nor can structured procedures be reduced to empty formalities.
“The legitimacy of public administration depends not merely on the existence of power, but on the disciplined and transparent exercise of that power in accordance with law,” the ruling noted.
Commenting on the FCC judgment, advocate Abdul Moiz Jaferii said he agreed “wholeheartedly that appointments to important public offices; such as those of superior court judges, must demonstrably conform to constitutional standards of fairness, transparency, institutional integrity and must be merit-based”.
“And that such appointments cannot be exercised on undisclosed considerations nor can structured procedures such as the judicial commission be reduced to empty formalities,” he added.
Jaferii also welcomed the judgment, saying that “when the tide turns, it will be a fit precedent for the unwinding of the 26th and 27th amendment courts”.
The matter was heard by a three-member FCC bench headed by Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi.
According to the judgment, the record showed that after the advertisement for the post of Chairman, BISE Bannu, the government constituted a Search and Scrutiny Committee on February 8, 2021, to evaluate candidates and recommend three names in accordance with the terms of reference.
The committee examined the shortlisted candidates and forwarded three names for consideration by the chief minister.
However, the court noted that the original summary, which had been duly processed through the administrative hierarchy, was later altered without any fresh deliberation by the committee, without any recorded reasons and without any lawful justification apparent from the record.
“The Petitioner, who was not among the candidates recommended by the Committee, was later inserted in the summary dated 28.01.2025 and ultimately appointed by the competent authority through notification dated 13.05.2025,” says the order.Read More
