ISLAMABAD:
As the curtain falls on 2025, the year is increasingly seen by legal experts as one of the bleakest for judicial independence, following the passage of the 26th and 27th constitutional amendments and the steady consolidation of executive dominance over the overall judiciary.
Throughout the year, the executive remained firmly in the driver’s seat, leading many observers to label 2025 as a complete disaster for the judiciary. Early hopes that the courts could push back and restore institutional balance gradually faded as a series of legal and constitutional developments aligned with the government’s agenda.
When the current regime succeeded in passing the 26th Constitutional Amendment last October, with the facilitation of the then Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, expectations were raised that the Supreme Court under CJ Yahya Afridi would resist encroachment on judicial independence and act as a counterweight to the executive.
However, expectations were quickly dampened. Judges occupying key positions appeared to fully support the executive agenda, particularly in matters relating to the appointment and transfer of judges.
The SC could not even decide petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment, which empowered a parliamentary committee to select the Chief Justice of Pakistan from among three senior judges. The decision of these petitions was widely considered to be crucial in ensuring the independence of the judiciary.
Notably, the SC did not decide petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment, which empowered a parliamentary committee to select the Chief Justice of Pakistan from among three senior judges. The decision of these petitions was widely considered to be crucial in ensuring the independence of the judiciary.
Instead, the government bypassed the three chief justices and nominated Justice Aminuddin Khan as the head of the Constitutional Benches (CB). This was followed by the appointment of a majority of judges perceived to be aligned with the government to these benches.
A three-member committee headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, with Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar as members, did not prioritize the fixation of petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment.
Interestingly, the committee continued to list cases where executive relief was sought, with results consistently in favor of the current government.
First, the Constitutional Court overruled an earlier Supreme Court ruling and approved the trial of civilians in military courts.
Second, it overturned an SC judgment that had held that the PTI was entitled to reserved seats after the February 8 elections.
That decision enabled the current government to secure a two-thirds majority in the National Assembly.
Lawyer Abdul Moiz Jaferii says that after the 26th and 27th amendments, Pakistan’s judiciary is looking more and more like the bureaucracy that finally conquered it. We used to talk about important decisions of our Supreme Court.
“About the different legal perspectives that different gentlemen on the bench are in favor of. Courtroom vlogs would be about where a particular case is going. Today we’re talking about which judge is in favor and which one is against it. Which judge will be forced to resign and which judge will be corrected,” he adds
The Jaferii lawyer states that court vlogs talk about which favored judge has the better government-assigned car and which building the new Supreme Court will take over. What is lost is the little hint of what used to be law and its evolution,” he adds.
During the outgoing year, the government also initiated the transfer of judges from various high courts to the Islamabad High Court. The Chief Justices of the respective High Courts along with Chief Justice Afridi consented to the transfer of three judges to the IHC.
Five IHC judges, who had earlier written to the Supreme Judicial Council alleging agency interference in judicial affairs, strongly protested the transfers, terming them a violation of judicial independence.
They approached the SC arguing that the executive plan was tainted with mala fides and driven by the federation’s desire to punish serving IHC judges and effect a “takeover” of a Supreme Court.
However, the constitutional bench headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar in its majority decision upheld the transfer of the three judges. The issue of judicial seniority was also referred to the President for decision.
In their minority opinion, Justices Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Shakeel Ahmad observed that the transfer of judges from various high courts to the IHC was tainted with malice and aimed at taking control of the Islamabad High Court.
Subsequently, the five IHC judges filed an internal appeal of the majority decision, but the case could not be referred for hearing before the adoption of the 27th constitutional amendment.
After the transfer decision, the transferred Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar was appointed as Chief Justice of Islamabad High Court. He had previously served as Acting IHC Chief Justice.
Justice Dogar did not disappoint the executive after his elevation. Observers noted that the PTI failed to secure any significant relief during his tenure. PTI leaders even approached the IHC seeking an early hearing on Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi’s applications for suspension of judgments in the Al-Qadir Trust case.
Despite the passage of several months, the IHC did not take a position on these applications. Likewise, the Adiala jail authorities did not comply with IHC orders regarding Imran Khan’s meetings with party leaders and others.
With the superior judiciary increasingly seen as permissive, the government went ahead and passed the 27th constitutional amendment in November. Under the amendment, the SC’s jurisdiction to interpret the Constitution, hear questions of public interest and adjudicate key legal issues was transferred to the newly created Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), whose judges are appointed by the executive branch.
Justice Aminuddin Khan was appointed as the first Chief Justice of the FCC just two weeks before his retirement.
The FCC has now become the highest court, with its rulings binding on all courts, including the SC, which has effectively been reduced to an appellate forum.
Despite these changes, Justice Yahya Afridi’s appointment as the Chief Justice of Pakistan was retained through the constitutional amendment.
Following the passage of the 27th Amendment, SC Justices Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Athar Minallah retired from office. Lahore High Court Judge Shams Mahmood Mirza also offered his resignation.
Notably, no visible opposition emerged from the superior judiciary to halt the 27th Amendment, despite its far-reaching implications for judicial independence.
Recently, Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, who has signed the letter of the six judges, was removed from office by the IHC on the basis of an invalid degree. However, the case was already pending before the Sindh High Court, a fact which the IHC reportedly ignored.
Since the passage of the 26th Constitutional Amendment, judges who are not perceived to be in the good books of the current regime have reported growing insecurity, with many being sidelined by their own colleagues.
