Open decision-making is symbolic of a judiciary with nothing to hide.
No matter how much lawyers would like to state the obvious, certain considerations come in the way.
Suo motu actions, for all their perceived good, are inherent illustrations of the failure of the judicial system.
The problem lies in the interests and capacities of the various players that drive the judicial set-up.
The lawyers movement failed to bring about change.
What has kept Pakistan from becoming a centre for arbitration?
What determines which approach of a judge?
Did the president act on his own, or on the PM’s advice?
What does the pandemic mean for businesses?
The religious right has been propped up for short-term gains.
The PTI is trying to settle political debates through the court.
Even if justified in their protest, the lawyers were certainly not justified in the manner in which they protested.
The courts may be well-meaning but charity must begin at home.
Our judges are just one cog in the judicial wheel.
High-stakes civil suits languish in overburdened high courts.
Some say the system of appointing judges is outdated.
If justice is a chariot then the bar and bench are its two wheels.
There is little legal basis to arguments in support of Islamabad’s slum residents.
Confirmation doubts prevent lawyers from taking up judicial service.
The ability to dissent has lost much ground.