ISLAMABAD:
Former Supreme Court Justice Mansoor Ali Shah on Monday raised serious questions over the Supreme Judiciary’s proposal to establish an International Commercial Court of Pakistan (ICCP) through a constitutional amendment, saying the ICCP could not become a destination for global trade unless Pakistan first restores confidence in the rule of law, judicial independence and constitutional governance.
Talking with Express Pakinomistsaid former Supreme Court Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, until these foundations are firmly in place, creating a new court risks being seen as a cosmetic reform rather than a meaningful one.
Justice Shah said that institutions could not be created merely by notification. “The proposal to establish an international commercial court in Pakistan raises more questions than it answers, as the notice provides no details on the proposed court’s jurisdiction, composition, appellate structure, procedural law, provisions for arbitration, or whether international judges will be appointed. Without these essentials, any meaningful assessment is impossible.”
He former SC judge further stated that international trade courts do not derive credibility from constitutional amendments or legislation as they derive it from the legal ecosystem they operate in. “Investors value the independence of judges, certainty of law, enforceability of contracts, respect for arbitral awards and freedom from executive interference. They invest in institutions, not slogans.”
The retired judge said jurisdictions such as Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Qatar are often cited as successful examples. Their political systems may differ from constitutional democracies, but they have deliberately built commercial legal systems that have international trust.
“They have not suffered from a perception that their commercial courts have been institutionally trapped or staffed with judges who lack independence. Their commitment to commercial rule of law is precisely what gives investors confidence,” he added.
He further stated that Pakistan presents a different picture. It remains dependent on the antiquated Arbitration Act of 1940, which embodies a philosophy of extensive judicial intervention rather than modern arbitration.
“More importantly, confidence in any commercial court ultimately depends on confidence in the judiciary itself. If judicial independence is questioned, no specialized commercial court can overcome the institutional deficit,” he added.
Barrister Asad Rahim Khan said it is quite unbelievable, at a time when the constitution of historically regressive amendments has not even been touched for years, that the court is dealing with such issues. “This is our new language of rights: QR codes, light bulbs, digitization, commerce, while incredible judgments are handed down to lawyers like Imaan Mazari and Hadi Chattha.”
Former federal minister Fawad Chaudhry, himself an advocate, said the pursuit of structural expansion through increased bureaucracy or new courts ignores the underlying crisis of institutional legitimacy.
“The 26th and 27th Amendments have catalyzed a sharp decline in judicial credibility. To move forward, we must abandon superficial fixes and implement comprehensive structural reform, rooted in a commitment to meritocracy and public accountability,” says Fawad Chaudhry.
However, Abdul Moiz Jaferii the lawyer said that given that Pakistani companies would do anything to keep their disputes outside the Pakistani legal system, it is funny that the LJCP feels that an international commercial court is viable in this country.
“In the name of expediency, we have tried to create exceptions on several occasions; rather than trying to solve the problems facing the justice system itself. We created terror courts to get the terrorists, banking courts to speed up the judicial process there, drug courts and most recently the constitutional court.”
Jaferii further states that instead of carving out yet another exception to the delays and lack of competence complained about, it would be better to focus on raising the standard of justice across the normal route and through normal courts.
Commenting on the proposal, the former lawyer says more courts, more appointments, more protocols and endless perks would be the result.
“What business judges have proposed laws. Their constitutional obligation to interpret the laws and decide cases and not as an adviser to Parliament.”
However, Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar welcomed the proposal. He termed the recommendation as a landmark constitutional and judicial reform that is the need of the hour to strengthen Pakistan’s commercial justice system and support sustainable economic growth.
He noted that specialized commercial courts have become a defining feature of successful economies, citing the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC), the UK’s Business and Property Courts, the Dubai International Financial Center (DIFC) Courts, the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) Courts and the Delaware Court of Chancery in the US as globally recognized models. These institutions have significantly improved commercial dispute resolution by offering specialized judges, speedy procedures, predictable outcomes and internationally respected judgments, thereby strengthening investor confidence and attracting foreign investment.
According to Khokhar, Pakistan needs to adopt a similar institutional model to meet the growing demands of international trade and cross-border investment.
He stressed that the proposed Federal Commercial Court should be granted exclusive jurisdiction over high value commercial disputes, international commercial contracts, foreign investment disputes, cross-border trade and business transactions, banking and finance, corporate and shareholder disputes, mergers and acquisitions, infrastructure and energy projects, public-private partnerships, insurance and reconstruction claims, shipping and resolution, intellectual property, electronic commerce, competition law and all arbitration-related matters, including recognition and enforcement of domestic and foreign arbitration awards.
