Islamabad:
There has been a traction at Islamabad High Court (IHC) since the transfer of three judges from other high courts, and the capital’s Supreme Court now seems visibly divided into two camps.
The clash between IHC judges is expected to intensify as Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, who was one of the three transferred judges, has replaced Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz with Justice Inaam Amen Minhas as the “competent authority” to hear harassment complaints.
This replacement took place after Justice Saman initiated a study – under protection against the harassment of women in the workplace – on a complaint filed by lawyer Imaan Mazari against Chief Justice Dogar herself. Justice Saman had already put together a study committee consisting of Justice Ejaz Ishaq Khan, Justice Arbab Tahir and herself.
Imaan Mazari filed the complaint after her change with Chief Justice during the hearing of a case on September 11. IMAAN has also approached the Supreme Court Council (SJC) and sought the removal of IHC chef due to mismatch.
Meanwhile, a division bench led by Justice Dogar is set to hear a petition today (Tuesday) who challenges the appointment of Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri for allegedly holding an invalid LLB degree. The petition was filed by lawyer Mian Daud.
Attorneys are questioning whether a quo warranto petition can be maintained against a sitting judge.
Justice Dogar’s transfer to IHC was challenged by five judges, including Justice Jahangiri. They question whether it is not a conflict of interest for IHC Chief Justice to hear the case themselves.
The discretionary powers in Pakistan’s discretionary powers to form benches were regulated through the Supreme Court (practice and procedure), 2023. However, the concept of “Master of the Roster” is still ruled in the high courts, especially IHC.
Here, two judges have been excluded from single benches, while senior Puisne, Judge, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, is not included in any division bench for a long time.
The current government had expressed dissatisfaction with a letter written last year by six IHC judges who had sought guidance from SJC on interference from performing agencies in legal functions.
Former Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa was also reportedly dissatisfied with this letter.
Last November last year, the government adopted the 26th constitutional amendment trying to control the overall judiciary. Although the amendment did not directly affect IHC’s function, the executive improved influence on the appointment and increase of Superior Court judges.
Then the government succeeded in appointing two additional judges to IHC and also transferred to the three judges from other high courts, which affects the seniority of existing judges.
Interestingly, the transfers have already been approved by a constitutional bench by the Supreme Court, which has not yet been to give its detailed judgment in the case. The government ultimately reached its primary goal by appointing Justice Dogar as the IHC High Court.
Since his appointment, no high profiled cases have been listed before senior judges, and appeals in court have been entertained against their temporary orders. Many lawyers now claim that those who approved the transfer of judges to IHC are responsible for the ongoing turmoil in court.
