In a movement largely seen as "packaging"The Federal Government has succeeded in mixing the play of the High Court of Islamabad (IHC) by transferring three judges of other high courts – a development considered as crucial by the executive due to the role of the court in the hearing of Very publicized business, in particular those involving PTI and its leader, Imran Khan. A notification issued by the Ministry of Law announced the transfer of three judges of different high lessons to the IHC.
"In Exercise of the PowerS Conferred Under Clause (1) of Article 200 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is Pleased to Transfer Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, Judge, Lahore High Court from Lahore High Court at the High Court of Islamabad, judge Khadim Hussain Soomro, judge, high court of the Sindh of the High Court of the Sindh at the High Court of Islamabad; And judge Muhammad Asif, judge, high court of Balutchistan at the High Court of Islamabad," the notification indicated. The Dogar judge ranks 15th in seniority at the High Court of Lahore (LHC), while judge Soomro is 28th before the high court of the Sindh (SHC). Judge Muhammad Asif was recently appointed to the High Court of Baloutchistan last month. The appointment of the Dogar judge to the LHC occurred in June 2015, while the judge then superior of the IHC, Mohin Akhtar Kayani, was inducted in December 2015. The reshuffle triggered a debate on the determination of the seniority of the judges of the judges in the IHC. Five IHC judges wrote to the main judges, arguing that the transferred judges must take an oath under article 194 of the Constitution to serve in a new high court.
"Likewise, its seniority would be determined from the date of the oath which it takes for the purpose of the height of the High Court of Islamabad: that the seniority is determined from the oath for such a high courtyard, during which the judge must serve," The letter indicates. However, it is unlikely that the Government and the IHC chief judge, Aamer Farooq, accept this interpretation. The judicial power under pressure between the establishment and the majority of the judges of the IHC increased, in particular after the judges wrote to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) requesting councils on the alleged engineers of the intelligence agencies in legal matters . IHC judges said they were facing immense pressure during the tyranny affair and explained how the legal proceedings were manipulated in large -scale matters. The head of the PTI, Imran Khan, has already filed an misconduct against the CJ Aamer Farooq of the IHC, alleging that he had been ignored on several occasions the requests of his colleagues judges to act against a blatant interference in The functioning of the court by state agencies, or had actively played a part of the part by ensuring that such interference continued tirelessly. The Senior and PTI leader, Chaudhry Fawad Hussain, compared the situation to 1937 "mail" Plan of the American president Franklin D. Roosevelt.
"The packaging of the courts is a well -known concept. Packing the courts is the idea of adding judges to the upper court or to the lower courts to move the balance in favor of the executive," he noted. The lawyer warned that the practice was in full swing in Pakistan where the courts are literally subject to the executive by appointing favorable judges. "This eroded the independence of the judiciary and transformed it into a judiciary of the PCO era."
In addition to that, he stressed that the implementation of judges on an ethnic basis was the "The worst thing that can happen in Pakistan," adding that unfortunately, for a limited political advantage, "The executive branch plays with the solidarity of the country."
Lawyer lawyer Faisal Siddiqi warned that if this decision was not reversed, "On February 1, 2025, we will remember him as the beginning of the complete destruction of the IHC".
"Only the mobilization of lawyers can save us now," said. Meanwhile, the Council of the Islamabad Bar (IBC) unanimously condemned the government’s decision, calling for an attack on judicial independence.
"This decision is an affront to the independence of the judiciary and undermines the rights and the representation of the legal fraternity in Islamabad. The Islamabad Bar Council firmly opposes this decision and is determined to resist these unjustified transfers which ignore the fundamental principles of judicial autonomy and regional representation," IBC said. In response, the Council called an emerging session in the general chamber today (Sunday) at 11:00 am, joined by the Islamabad High Court Bar Association and the Islamabad District Bar Association. A press conference will follow at 1:00 p.m. to describe its future plan. All eyes on JCP, all eyes are now at the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) and if he will approve of the elevation of judge Aamer Farooq at the Supreme Court. If it is high, the question remains: who will be the next IHC chief judge? Legal analyst Reema Omer, commenting on the current judicial crisis, wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that developments linked to the judiciary since Parliament promulgated the 26th amendment in October 2024 confirms the fears that it was not A sincere “reform” to make the judges “responsible” in October “. Instead, what we see is the most blatant attempt at judicial capture by a precarious regime struggling with legitimacy. She underlined how a special parliamentary committee secretly appointed judge Yahya Afridi as CJP without public disclosure criteria. In addition, the Parliament has doubled the number of SC judges from 17 to 33 and increased the judges of the IHC from 9 to 12 years. The law on practice and procedure has also been modified to modify the training rules of the benches. The constitutional bench appointed on November 5 had no clear criterion, and many urgent constitutional petitions remain unknown. On December 13, the constitutional bench allowed the military courts to announce verdicts against civilians, pending a final decision. Lawyer Hafiz Ehsaan Ahmad said that the next legal question would be to determine the seniority of the judges of the IHC assignee following the transfer of three judges of three different lessons to the IHC, after having invoked the provisions of article 200 of the Constitution. According to him, the date of appointment as a judge of the High Court often determines the seniority of this judge. However, he argued that seniority among the judges of the High Court is determined by the principle that the date of appointment and the Office Oath are the main seniority criteria. If several judges are appointed on the same day, seniority will be determined by the order in which their names appear in the appointment mandate issued by the president. He said that, since the judges had already taken an oath when he was first appointed before their respective high lessons, article 194 of the Constitution would not apply to the current transfer of judges. He added that article 205, read with the fifth appendix of the Constitution, deals with the remuneration and conditions of the judges of the Supreme Court and the High Court. According to him, the remuneration of a judge, privileges and other conditions of service cannot be modified in their prejudice while they serve and any change under terms and conditions, in particular transfer policies – require a constitutional amendment or appropriate legislation. He concluded, taking into account the current constitutional situation, that as judge Sarfraz Dogar had been transferred from the LHC to the IHC, his name will now be considered as the most high -end judge of this last court because of his Previous appointment as judge of the LHC judge, compared to other current judges of the IHC. The legal expert also said that if the outgoing CJ IHC is raised to SC at the next JCP meeting, the name of Dogar judge will not only be added to the panel of the three highest judges for the appointment of the IHC CJ. However, it will also be taken into account by the JCP, as well as the other two highest judges, for such a vacancy in accordance with the Constitution and under the new JCP rules, promulgated in 2024.
