AFTER practising law for five years as an advocate, one observation has become increasingly difficult for me to ignore; access to justice in Pakistan is based on the social status of the clients and their lawyer’s reputation and influence. While the Constitution says there should be equality before the law, the reality inside many a courtroom often tells quite a different story. This story is tragic and unfortunate.

Those who can afford ‘prominent’ and ‘influential’ lawyers often appear to have a significant advantage over those who cannot do that. They secure bail more swiftly, obtain stay orders with relative ease, and even receive timely relief. In contrast, litigants with limited financial means struggle to face a system that seems far less forgiving. They face prolonged trials, repeated adjournments and stricter procedural consequences.

For daily-wage earners, the burden of litigation actually extends far beyond the courtroom. Attending regular hearings often requires them to spend the entire day waiting in court, from morning till evening, causing them to lose their daily income. Each missed day’s wage means a missed meal, unpaid bills and growing financial insecurity. Coupled with the stress, uncertainty, and emotional strain of prolonged legal proceedings, the trial itself becomes a punishment.

This disparity becomes particularly visible in most property disputes. Land- grabbers and influential individuals, backed by substantial financial resources, often engage high-profile counsels with strong ‘professional reputation’ and ‘institutional influence’. Interim stay orders are obtained, proceedings are delayed, and cases remain pending for years, while the rightful owners continue to wait for justice. The same imbalance is evident in criminal litigation. Those with financial resources are quite often able to secure ‘effective’ legal representation that maximises every available legal remedy. Meanwhile, an accused person of limited means struggles even to furnish the surety required for bail. Unable to arrange the necessary amount, many remain behind the bars, not because they have been found guilty, but because poverty stands between them and their liberty.

This is not really a criticism of the legal profession at large. Indeed, there are lawyers who diligently represent their clients, but the number of black sheep has been on the rise. Besides, every lawyer, when hired, has a duty to defend those who seek legal representation. The fault lies with the justice system which acknowledges the ‘influential’ status of such lawyers and plays into their hands.

A society cannot truly claim to uphold the rule of law if justice is effectively determined by one’s financial capacity. Justice should be blind to wealth, status and influence. Until every citizen — rich or poor — can stand before the courts with an equal opportunity to be heard and protected, the promise of equal justice will remain more of an aspiration than a reality.

Sarfraz Ali Soomro
Karachi

Published in Dawn, September 3rd, 2026