Tensions within Pakistan’s judiciary are escalating as two judges of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) challenge recent case transfers, raising concerns over judicial authority and procedural irregularities.
Justice Babar Sattar recused himself from hearing a wrongful termination case on March 14, stating, “It would be in the best interest of justice if another Bench hears the instant petition.”
However, Acting Chief Justice Sardar Mohammad Sarfraz Dogar reassigned the case to his court. In response, Justice Sattar on Friday issued a strong order challenging the decision.
“The file has inexplicably been returned to the docket of this Court with remarks recorded on the administrative side made by the Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice that the case is to be heard by the same Bench,” Justice Sattar stated.
He argued that the Chief Justice has no authority to determine whether a court should hear a case, referencing Lahore High Court Rules, which the IHC follows. He stressed that only a bench can decide case transfers, particularly when a judge has recused himself.
Justice Sattar’s order clarified that the Chief Justice’s role is limited to approving the roster of benches prepared by the Deputy Registrar. He directed that the case file be sent to the Deputy Registrar for reassignment according to the approved roster.
Justice Ishaq raises similar concerns
Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan also questioned the transfer of a contempt petition without the presiding judge’s consent. He initiated contempt proceedings against court officials over the move.
He noted that the petitioner’s counsel had not requested the transfer, yet visitation cases were consolidated, leading to an automatic reassignment.
The transfer was made under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). However, the advocate general admitted that this section did not apply, as a high court bench is not considered a subordinate court, raising further legal concerns.
Justice Khan was presiding over contempt petitions against Adiala Jail officials regarding the visitation rights and conditions of former Prime Minister Imran Khan. He expressed displeasure after the case was abruptly transferred to a larger bench without his approval.
The IHC later formed a three-member bench, including Acting Chief Justice Dogar, Justice Arbab Mohammad Tahir, and Justice Mohammad Azam Khan, to hear all petitions related to Imran Khan’s jail conditions.
Transfer controversy
Last month, three judges were transferred to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) from other provincial high courts: Justice Sardar Mohammad Sarfraz Dogar from the Lahore High Court (LHC), Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro from the Sindh High Court (SHC), and Justice Muhammad Asif from the Balochistan High Court (BHC). The controversy revolves around the alteration of the seniority list following their appointments.
The dispute escalated when Justice Dogar was appointed as acting Chief Justice of the IHC after Justice Aamer Farooq’s elevation to the Supreme Court. Five existing IHC judges—Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Justice Babar Sattar, Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz—opposed the appointment. They argued that transferred judges should be considered junior to sitting judges since the Constitution requires them to take a new oath upon transfer.
The five judges boycotted Justice Dogar’s oath-taking ceremony, prompting President Asif Ali Zardari to administer the oath instead of a senior judge. They had earlier approached Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi and then-IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq to contest their loss of seniority. However, Justice Farooq rejected their argument, ruling that judicial transfers under Article 200 of the Constitution do not reset seniority.
The controversy has since extended beyond the IHC. Four Supreme Court judges—Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Ayesha Malik, and Justice Athar Minallah—wrote to the Chief Justice of Pakistan, describing the transfers as "suspect.”
