President Asif Ali Zardari’s withheld approval for additional judges to four high courts has triggered unease in legal circles, with the government now exploring constitutional workarounds. The Judicial Commission of Pakistan, led by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, finalized nominations on July 20-21, but the summary remains pending at the presidency, delaying a scheduled July 27 oath-taking ceremony. Main Developments Top legal aides have conveyed reservations to President Zardari about some judges-designate, including that a couple have criminal cases registered against them. The government is examining whether Article 48 of the Constitution can be invoked if the delay persists, but presidency sources counter that the same article grants the president discretion without a fixed timeframe. Presidency sources pointed to Article 48 clause 2, which states the president “shall act in his discretion in respect of any matter in respect of which he is empowered by the Constitution to do so.” Legal experts noted the Supreme Court has previously ruled the president lacks discretion in appointing superior court judges and must follow the prime minister’s advice. Read also: Why Islamabad Police Is Adding 8,000 Personnel in Cadre-Based Hiring Background Under Article 175A of the Constitution, the Judicial Commission nominates one person per vacancy and forwards recommendations to the prime minister, who advises the president to make appointments. The commission had recommended three judges for the Islamabad High Court (Ayyaz Shaukat, Shahrukh Arjumand, Umair Majeed Malik), three for the Sindh High Court (Humayon Khan, Suresh Kumar, Dr Shah Nawaz Memon) leaving two seats vacant, and ten for the Lahore High Court. Commission meetings showed disagreements over candidates, according to sources. The delay follows a pattern of tensions between the judiciary and executive over judicial appointments in Pakistan. Why It Matters The holdup affects the operational capacity of four high courts—Islamabad, Lahore, Sindh, and Balochistan—which handle critical cases ranging from constitutional challenges to criminal appeals. A prolonged delay could undermine public confidence in the appointment process and strain relations between the judiciary and the presidency, potentially triggering a constitutional crisis. What's Next The president’s spokesperson Murtaza Solangi said appointments would proceed in due time. Law ministry officials expressed optimism for an amicable resolution, noting constitutional alternatives exist if needed. The government’s next move—whether to invoke Article 48 or seek a judicial ruling—remains unclear, with no deadline set for the president’s decision.