Justice Babar Sattar (L), Justice Saman Riffat Imtiaz (M) and Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani. Photos: IHC website
ISLAMABAD:
The Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) on Tuesday approved the transfer of Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges Mohsin Akhtar Kayani to Lahore High Court (LHC), Justice Babar Sattar to Peshawar High Court (PHC) and Justice Saman Riffat Imtiaz to Sindh High Court (SHC).
According to a statement issued by the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCP), the JCP held a series of meetings today to consider the transfer of Supreme Court judges, with discussions conducted under the chairmanship of Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi.
“The meetings were convened by the Secretary of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (22) of Article 175A of the Constitution, when the Chairman of the Commission, while giving reasons therefor, refused to convene the meeting at the request of one-third of the total members,” it said.
The statement said the JCP deliberated on various transfer proposals in which the concerned chief justices of the Supreme Court participated as members of the commission. The transfer decisions were made in accordance with the powers of the Constitution and the procedural rules of the JCP.
In addition, proposals for transfers of Justice Arbab Tahir and Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro were withdrawn by the members who had requisitioned them. The commission also decided by a majority vote that any vacancy created by a judicial transfer would be filled through additional transfers, rather than initial appointments.
Read also: CJP raises alarm over judicial transfers
Members of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf attended the meeting after earlier boycotting similar sessions ahead of the 27th constitutional amendment.
Addressing the media, PTI chairman and commission member Barrister Gohar Ali Khan said, “We will ask the commission to cancel the issue of judicial transfers,” adding that the party would present its reservations to the forum.
He said a decision had been taken not to boycott the meeting, noting that “over the last four years, institutional structures have been significantly affected” and that “there is a need to strengthen the judiciary in the current situation.”
Another commission member, PTI’s Senator Ali Zafar, questioned the process, saying, “Judges should not be transferred without reason.”
He said “there should be solid reasons for such transfers,” adding that rules should have been framed before going ahead with transfers, describing Justice Sattar’s letter as a “valid demand”.
When asked if the PTI and the chief justice were aligned in opposing the transfers, Zafar replied: “Yes, we support Chief Justice Yahya Afridi’s position.”
Read more: CJ convenes JCP meeting on judge transfer
Last week, CJP Afridi had opposed the proposed transfer of the five judges to other high courts, warning that such a move could undermine judicial independence and set an unwanted precedent.
It was learned that JCP members were divided over the proposals. Sources had told Express Pakinomist that a strong section within the government and the legal fraternity opposed the transfer of Justice Soomro and Justice Tahir.
Explaining his opposition, CJP Afridi said it would be inappropriate to convene the JCP meeting within 15 days under such circumstances, warning that allowing such transfers could normalize the treatment of judges as replaceable.
“Such an approach would have serious consequences for the institutional integrity of the judiciary, while at the same time eroding public confidence in its independence and stability. More importantly, the proposed transfers, if allowed, would essentially assume a punitive nature vis-à-vis the judges transferred: a result that finds no sanction anywhere in the overarching scheme or the overarching scheme. in Article 200 of the Constitution and is contrary to the fundamental principles of judicial independence and security of tenure,” says CJP Afridi.
He further noted that the requisition sought transfer of Justice Soomro who had already been shifted from SHC to IHC in February 2025 under Article 200 to promote federalism and fair representation.
“Being the stated rationale for his original transfer, it is clear that this request is fundamentally incompatible with the very purpose that informed the transfers to the IHC in February 2025.”
