
The rise of a larger but weaker judiciary?
Although Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJ) Yahya Afridi is excited about the induction of seven new judges to the Supreme Court, some legal experts consider such appointments as "court packing" to reduce the impact of independent judges in the apex court.
They are also questioning the timing of these appointments as a Constitutional Bench (CB) is hearing the applications for the constitution of a full court to hear petitions filed against the 26th Constitutional Amendment. Four SC judges have already raised their voice on the timing of these appointments.
Extraordinary arrangements are being made for the oath taking ceremony of six permanent judges today (Friday). It is learnt that more than 500 people are expected to attend the oath taking ceremony. CJ Afridi will administer the oath to these judges.
Doctor Yasser Kureshi, who recently wrote a book on judicial politics in Pakistan, said a government-dominated Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) is "packing" the Supreme Court with new judges, with the goal of diluting the proportion of judges opposed to the 26th amendment.
"This also now means that the government will have a bigger pool of pro-government judges from which to select the judges for the CBs for important cases related to the government's interests.
Kureshi stated that the government can be more confident that, for now, the judges seeking to push back against the amendment are outnumbered and sidelined. And the government will not have to worry about judicial scrutiny of its actions.
"We have seen such actions taken by authoritarian leaders in other countries like Hungary, Poland and Turkey in the past, and Pakistan today is following a similar script," he said.
Former federal minister Fawad Chaudhry, who is also an advocate of the Supreme Court said appointment of 43 judges, including seven Supreme Court judges, in less than 100 days raises eyebrows.
"Typically, court packing occurs after a Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO), but this time, it is happening without an Official PCO. This maneuver is as controversial as judicial appointments under martial law, and these judges are seen as facilitators of authoritarianism," he added.
Abdul Moiz Jaferii Advocate said we are seeing the predicted after effects of the 26th amendment playing out, with courts across the country being packed by politicians without reasons afforded.
"Now it is the Supreme Court's turn where many of the right judges are being elevated to for the wrong reasonsnot to afford them the highest judicial office of the land but to deprive them of their administrative and senior positions in their respective high courts.
"No reasons are afforded. No criteria are transparently laid out. Meanwhile the chief justice is assuring money lenders (IMF) that all is well," Jaferii added.
He also said this capture is not sustainable. It would not have been possible had there not been abettors from within. The bars have been sold out. The media has been brought to heels. The politicians meekly sign the dotted line of their own future death warrants.
"Lenin is quoted as saying that there are decades in which nothing happens and there are weeks in which decades happen. We are seeing weeks where decades worth of damage is being done to a system already burdened by decades of stagnation," Jaferii said.
Former additional attorney general Tariq Mahmood Khokhar, who has command over Pakistan judicial history, said that the diminution of judicial independence, both at the institutional and individual levels, is evident through the 26th Constitutional Amendment.
This represents a corrupt use of "constitutional" and "legal" means to achieve court packing, he said.
"The 26th Constitutional Amendment is sub judice, yet the executive's agenda continues unchecked. A manufactured majority in the JCP has turned it into a tool of the government," he said.
Khokhar said many perceive this as judicial capitulation. The constitutional fundamentals, including the separation of powers, have been rendered obsolete. Independent and impartial observers now expect a pliant judiciary in cases involving executive interests or power.
"The state of the judiciary is dire: it is increasingly less independent, less competent, and offers less impartial justice," he adds.
Hafiz Ehsaan Ahmad Advocate, however, defended the increase of the numbers of judges in the SC.
"The new judges have been appointed to the SC in view of the recent 26th Constitutional Amendment under two different Articles of the Constitution. "Four chief justices of different high courts are simultaneously also elevated to the SC which is also unprecedented."
He also said there are further chances that more judges will be brought in the SC under both provisions of Article 177 of the Constitution as still no judges from Punjab have been elevated.
According to the constitutional expert, the persistent differences among the top judiciary will not end but further increase until the issue of 26th Constitutional Amendment is not settled.
"Now it is the responsibility of the chief justice and other judges of the Supreme Court to make a viable strategy for early fixation of all fresh and old cases and to decide them in the shortest possible time so that the real fruits of such an increase of judges can trickle down to the litigants.
"It is high time that the judges of the SC should sit together and resolve their differences within the constitutional limits in their internal meetings and should not disclose their concerns in the media or through their observations in court proceedings."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Business Recorder
11 hours ago
- Business Recorder
‘Planting food, not hate': Brazil's Lula razzes Trump over tariff-hit grapes
BRASÍLIA: President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said on Saturday that he hopes Donald Trump can come and get to know the real Brazil, as the South American powerhouse reels from Washington's 50-percent tariffs. In a video taken while he planted grapes — one of the tariff-hit goods — Brazil's leftist leader addressed Trump. 'I hope you can visit someday so we can talk and you can get to know the true Brazil, the Brazil of people who love samba, carnival, soccer, the United States, China, Russia, Uruguay, and Venezuela. We love everyone,' Lula said. The tariffs imposed on Brazil are among the steepest to hit a US trading partner. And unlike with other countries, the measures against Brazil have been framed in openly political terms, with the Republican president justifying the move by alleging Brasilia is conducting a 'witch hunt' against his ally, former president Jair Bolsonaro. Bolsonaro is being tried for an alleged coup attempt against Lula in 2022, and the United States recently sanctioned the judge in the case, along with seven other Supreme Court magistrates. Lula has backed the Supreme Court and promises to defend 'the sovereignty of the Brazilian people.' His administration has also vowed to combat Trump's tariffs, including by lodging an appeal if necessary. The levies, which affect several key exports from the largest economy in Latin America, sweep aside centuries-old trade ties and a surplus that Brasilia put at $284 million last year. In his message on X, Lula said he was giving an example of 'planting food, and not planting violence, or planting hate.' 'I hope that someday we can talk, President Trump, so you can learn about the quality of the Brazilian people,' he adds.


Express Tribune
13 hours ago
- Express Tribune
SC policy sets vehicle, security perks for judges
The Supreme Court has issued a policy regarding the use of official vehicles by judges. The policy, called the Transport Entitlement Policy for the Judges of the Supreme Court 2025, will apply to incumbent and retired judges of the apex court. According to the Supreme Court Judges (Leave, Pension, Privileges) Order 1997, read with the Ministry of Law, Justice and Human Rights Division's letter dated 07.06.2007, on elevation, a Supreme Court judge is entitled to use two official cars up to 1800cc. "One vehicle shall be used as the 'primary car' (for official purposes), whereas the other one as the 'secondary/family car'. The vehicles so provided shall be maintained at government expense through the budgetary allocation of the Court with POL in both the cars up to 600 litres per month (as prescribed monthly ceiling or actual use) on production of a certificate by the respective Private Secretary of the Hon'ble Judge, as decided by the Full Court on 20.01.2010." Each judge shall also be entitled to the provision of two drivers: one provided by the Court from regular strength and the other appointed on a contingent basis. In exceptional circumstances or on an urgent-need basis, if requisitioned, a third car may be providedsubject to availabilityafter the approval of the Registrar for a maximum period of two weeks. If such a period requires further extension, it shall be allowed only with the approval of the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP), on payment of the prescribed charges. In any case, a third car shall not be retained beyond eight weeks in a year. Provision of Security (Escort) Vehicles The policy states that the CJP is entitled to security (escort vehicles) as per the Blue Book under the supervision of the Chief Security Officer (CSO). "Each Hon'ble Judge shall be entitled to the provision of a well-trained gunman with one security (escort) vehicle on a 1/4 ratio, provided by the Islamabad Police at the Principal Seat and by the Provincial Police Officers in case any Hon'ble Judge is in provincial jurisdiction. Where an Hon'ble Judge requires additional security given any threat, the Hon'ble Chief Justice of Pakistan shall approve a second escort." Post-Retirement Transport Entitlement The policy states that each regular judge of the Court, on retirement, may retain the primary car for a maximum period of one month, after which the vehicle shall be retrieved and returned to the Court's pool. "Each Hon'ble regular Judge of the Court, on retirement, shall be entitled to purchase a primary or secondary car at depreciated value as per existing government policy, provided that the Hon'ble Judge has not availed the facility previously." It further states that each retired judge of the Court, on demand during their stay in Islamabad or provincial capitals, as the case may be, shall be entitled to the provision of an official vehicle, subject to availability, on prescribed charges as determined by the Full Court, along with a complementary pick-and-drop facility to/from the airport. Disposal of Vehicles "According to the relevant Rules for the Use of Staff Cars, 1980, upon reaching the prescribed age/mileage limit, official vehicles shall be disposed of by prevailing law/rules. The procedure for disposal shall be transparent and in compliance with the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA) guidelines or other applicable laws for the time being enforced." It is also clarified that all costs incurred in connection with the procurement, maintenance, fuelling and operation of the official vehicles, as well as the employment of drivers, shall be met from the sanctioned budget of the Court under the respective heads. It is further clarified that in the event of any ambiguity or uncertainty regarding the interpretation of this policy, the matter shall be placed before the CJP for appropriate orders. Funeral arrangements policies The Supreme Court has issued new guidelines to manage arrangements on the demise of former judges, appointing focal persons to assist with funerals, transportation, and placement of floral wreaths. According to the office order, the Deputy Registrar (Miscellaneous) - or in his absence, the Assistant Registrar (Misc.), Senior Protocol Officer, or designated staff, will serve as focal person in Islamabad. Officers in charge of branch registries in Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar, and Quetta will perform similar duties at the provincial level.


Express Tribune
16 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Let the full court decide!
The wisdom and conduct of the Chief Justice of Pakistan is under the spotlight. His decision not to fix the high-profile case pertaining to the 26th constitutional amendment before the full court, as per lawful dictum, is now under legal and public scrutiny. It is a foregone conclusion, however, that Chief Justice Yahya Afridi squarely deviated from the laid-down rules in the Practice and Procedure Act of 2023, and rather opted for consulting all the judges on the prima facie of its hearing. Established under the Act, the three-member committee had, as per regulations, ordered the petitions challenging the amendment to be fixed before a full court on November 4, 2024, but the chief justice overrode it and the rest is history. The vital piece of legislation, which has literally torpedoed the functioning of organs of the state, is yet to get a judicial review as it lingers with the Constitutional Bench. The point that makes it ultra vires is that the Constitutional Bench is part of the challenged amendment, and thus it cannot sit in judgment until and unless the legislation's lawful status is decided. Moreover, how could the beneficiaries of the amendment decide about its future? Thus, lawyers and civil society are rightly questioning the rationale behind avoiding a full court hearing when there are precedents in such cases of public importance. The fact that the chief justice reportedly consulted each and every judge individually over the issue makes it mysterious. It points a finger at his conduct and outcome as to who will determine how many judges had opposed and what question was placed before each judge. The top judge has unnecessarily amassed criticism of his high office, and the need of the hour is to go back to the book and let the full court decide it. The judicial stream, of late, is quite wayward and all it needs is to stick to the dictates of the Constitution. A solemn hearing of the 26th amendment by the full court will not only put to rest legal veracity but also help restore judicial confidence among the masses.