An aspiring judge should be able to look at previous recruitment cycles and understand where candidates have historically struggled. Preparation could then become more informed rather than dependent on hearsay, coaching trends or speculation. High Courts could likewise identify recurring weaknesses and consider whether they require changes in the syllabus, examination design or preparatory guidance.

This is where the comparison with CSS becomes important. The point is not that judicial recruitment should become identical to a federal competitive examination. Judicial selection has its own constitutional and institutional requirements. Rather, where a public institution is selecting people for offices carrying enormous responsibility, the outcome should generate useful information for future candidates and the institution itself.

Consider Sindh. Its High Court has rules governing judicial service recruitment and has conducted recent recruitment through preliminary testing, written examinations and interviews, with requirements and qualifying standards made known to candidates.

These are welcome features. But why should recruitment remain dependent upon individual exercises rather than form part of a permanent, predictable cycle accompanied by an assessment of outcomes?

Punjab presents a similar question. Judicial examinations........

© The Nation