ISLAMABAD Analysing the criteria of judges appointment on Tuesday, Justice Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, one of the members of the 17-judge larger bench hearing certain clauses of the 18th Constitutional Amendment, remarked that the people who had been accused of murders were made judges in the past while 150 years old tradition of consultation had been eliminated in the new process of judges appointment. A 17-member bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry has ordered the Attorney General to prepare a questionnaire to respond the doubts and ambiguities in this regard and the Court also suggested the AG to share the details of proceedings with Senator Raza Rabbani. The Chief Justice said that the purpose of hearing to Raza Rabbani was to make clear the prevailing doubts and controversies and was not to destroy the system, adding, Rabbani as a lawyer will assist us and interpretation of Constitution is the duty of the Court. Justice Ramday said, We should have clear-cut policy, as the policy of appeasement is not a viable option. Resuming his arguments, the counsel for bar associations, Hamid Khan, said, There are certain portions of the newly introduced Article 175-A, which clearly violate the basic feature of the independence of judiciary and the principle of separation of judiciary from other organs of the state. He said that inclusion of the law minister and the attorney general in the judicial body was equal to snapping of judiciarys freedom and was also against the doctrine of separation. The attorney generals presence in the commission is also against the independence of judiciary as under the Clauses 2 and 3 of the Article 100, the AG is part of the Executive. The AG works under the Ministry of Law. But his inclusion in the commission clearly mutilates and disrupts the basic features of the Constitution, he argued. Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk asked if there was a commission, then how the idea of parliamentary committee was workable. Hamid Khan replied that it was not workable. Justice Asif Saeed Khosa remarked that the Law Minister and the AGs appointments were being made on temporary basis while judges appointments were made for a particular tenure. In such a situation how they could make consultees while such powers were not extended to acting chief justice. Jawwad S Khawaja said that seats of the AG and the DAGs had been like musical chairs for the last six moths, SC orders were not being obeyed and the AG also could not ensure the implementation. The Chief Justice said the AG, according to his/her oath, was not like judges. How can a person who is not under an oath can be relied? Similarly, a retired judge is also not under any oath. In their presence secrecy of the forum can not be ensured. These are the technical problems, which should be examined, the CJ observed. Justice Tasaddaq Hussain Jillani enquired, If the law minister and the attorney general are excluded from the Judicial Commission, then the lawyers community will have no objection? Hamid replied, Yes. Justice Saqib Nisar asked, Will the bar agree if collegiums of five senior most SC judges is formed? Hamid replied this aspect was not before the Court and presently he was seeking review of present provisions of the Constitution. Hamid Khan completed his argument. Justice Asif Saeed Khosa asked if it was accepted that bar was a stakeholder, then representatives of the litigants were also stakeholders. Justice Saqib Nisar said every system and every society had its own norms but independence of judiciary and fundamental rights must be protected. Justice Javed Iqbal said the procedure of judges appointment was not free of faults even in the past. Justice Shakirullah Jan said in the old procedure, administration had begun the process of judges appointment and this was the reason of consultation but in the new process, judiciary would appoint the judges.