PAKISTAN may well have one of the best-paid judiciaries acorss the developing world, but it paradoxically endures one of the worst-performing systems. This uncomfortable contradiction lies at the heart of a growing debate: why does a system ranked 129th out of 142 countries in the Rule of Law Index continue to command ever-increasing public resources?

In late 2024, the federal government approved a staggering 414 per cent increase in housing allowances for superior court judges. While the stated justification was to retain top legal talent, the move has triggered a broader, necessary question: can higher pay, in isolation, improve the performance of the judiciary?

According to the latest World Justice Project data, the contrast between compensation and institutional output is impossible to ignore. A judge of the superior judiciary now receives a monthly package exceeding Rs2 million, encompassing salary, allowances and extensive perks ranging from official vehicles to subsidised utilities.

Post-retirement benefits are equally substantial, with pensions for former chief justices costing millions. By any regional standard or metric, Pakistan’s judiciary is exceptionally well-compensated.

However, performance indicators present a bleak picture. Pakistan ranks 128th in civil justice, reflecting chronic delays and immense barriers to access. In criminal justice, it stands at 98th, while in ‘order and security’, it is placed 140th among the worst globally. These are not abstract rankings; they actually represent systemic inefficiencies that shatter the lives of citizens seeking timely justice.

The backlog crisis further compounds this dysfunction. As of 2025, approximately 1.86 million cases remain pending primarily in the district judiciary. For litigants, this translates into years, sometimes decades, of agonising uncertainty. In this landscape, justice delayed is not merely denied; it is buried.

Policy responses have largely focused on capacity, including proposals to increase the number of judges. However, capacity alone cannot resolve structural dys-function. Deeply entrenched procedural delays, archaic case management, and a culture of adjournments continue to stifle efficiency. More critically, serious concerns regarding accountability and institutional independence persist.

The underlying assumption that higher compensation automatically yields better performance remains unproven in Pakistan’s context. While competitive salaries are necessary to attract talent and ensure independence, they are not a substitute for institutional effectiveness.

Meaningful judicial reforms must move beyond financial incentives. There should be measurable performance benchmarks, modernised case management systems, and a credible framework for account-ability. Without these reforms, increased expenditure risks becoming an unsustain-able burden rather than a meaningful investment.

The judiciary in Pakistan today stands at a crossroads. It enjoys significant financial privilege and constitutional protection, but struggles to deliver the very service it is mandated to provide. For the ordinary citizens, the cost of justice continues to rise, even as its delivery remains a distant hope.

Unless structural reform accompanies financial expansion, the gap between pay and performance will only widen with time.

Israr Ahmed Shah
Karachi

Published in Dawn, June 23rd, 2026