ANOTHER day, another spat within the judiciary. It appears that there is still very little realisation within the institution that the damage that has been and is being caused to its reputation may take many years to reverse.

The most recent development pertains to the reconstitution of an Islamabad High Court tribunal that had been hearing a Judicial Service Appeal filed by a judge against the appointment and subsequent elevation of another judge in the subordinate judiciary.

The tribunal, which included Justices Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Babar Sattar and Sardar Ejaz, was reconstituted on March 18 by President Asif Ali Zardari on the advice of acting IHC Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfaraz Dogar, reportedly after it had already arrived at a decision on the petition before it. The tribunal has now issued its judgement disregarding the reconstitution order, ruling that the law does not allow that the IHC and its subordinate judiciary be filled with judges borrowed from other courts.

Ordering the IHC registrar “to return all members presently serving in the subordinate judiciary for Islamabad Capital Territory on deputation within six months”, the tribunal has observed that, “any decision by the chief justice or a committee appointed by the chief justice that is not in accordance with the requirements of the law is not sustainable in the eyes of law, including decisions with regard to an appointment on deputations, induction, or promotion, and is liable to be set aside by this tribunal”.

Not only that, but the tribunal has held that neither the president nor the acting chief justice had any authority to reconstitute it without legal justification. It has held the appointment of various deputed judges as unlawful, declared the reconstitution of the tribunal as ‘unconstitutional’ and underlined that the IHC acting chief justice has no authority to interfere with the tribunal’s functions.

Ever since the controversial 26th Amendment, it has been observed that the judiciary has been having considerable difficulty functioning ‘normally’ due to the slew of changes to its operational structure and the government’s expanded role in its internal affairs. It may be recalled that a similar dispute previously arose in the Supreme Court, when an important case was abruptly moved from one bench to another against judicial norms, ostensibly in anticipation of an adverse ruling.

Public perceptions of the institution’s independence and neutrality have taken a hit due to the bitter and often very public spats between senior judges, which continue to signal considerable dissatisfaction within the institution regarding how it is being conducted. This latest dispute, too, will soon land before the Supreme Court, where one can, with quite a bit of surety, expect it to stir further controversy. The judiciary’s fall has been tragic, but only the institution can save itself.

Published in Dawn, March 23rd, 2025