.
Justice Yahya Afridi. PHOTO: FILE
ISLAMABAD:
Despite the Supreme Court’s confident claims of sweeping reforms in the justice system, most legal experts remain unconvinced about the judiciary’s performance during Chief Justice Yahya Afridi’s first year in office.
The 26th Constitutional Amendment, passed in October last year, shortly before Justice Afridi took oath as the country’s top judge, remains a point of contention in legal circles.
As the SC a year under his leadership, it has expressed complete satisfaction with its institutional performance, releasing detailed data on Sunday to defend the progress.
CJP Afridi appreciated judges, lawyers and the federal government “for their steadfast dedication and support in advancing the shared vision of a justice system that is accessible, transparent, and efficient” during his tenure.
Reflecting on what he termed a “transformative year,” the CJP highlighted that this progress “stems from a united effort and institutional collaboration”.
He outlined three core pillars — accessibility, accountability and efficiency — as the driving forces behind what the court described as “measurable improvements and lasting change”.
However, former additional attorney general Tariq Mahmood Khokhar dismissed the court’s self-assessment, saying it “symbolises institutional impotence rather than constitutional authority; its contents do not reflect judicial authority but inconsequential administrative rhetoric”.
“The critical issues remain unmentioned and unresolved: judicial capture at the behest of the executive and legislature lacking constitutional and democratic legitimacy, erosion of the principle of separation of powers, and the rule of law,” he said.
‘Adjudicatory, not collaborative’
Khokhar further pointed out that the phrase “institutional collaboration” was incompatible with judicial independence. “The judiciary is an independent and a co-equal branch. Its constitutional role is adjudicatory, not collaborative. Courts exist not to collaborate with governments or other institutions but to constrain them and review their powers.”
“Any form of collaboration with the executive or legislature, especially unrepresentative ones, risks undermining judicial independence. Collaboration converts guardians into partners,” he cautioned.
He further argued that “our drift towards a praetorian judiciary evokes no notice from the CJP. A two-tiered judiciary also remains unnoticed. It appears that the CJP has an issue with noticing the existential threats to the institution he heads”.
According to SC data, pendency of cases has been reduced over the past year. A total of 22,848 cases were instituted, 161,733 cases were fixed before various benches, and 27,228 were decided, reducing the total backlog from 60,410 to 55,951 cases.
Priority was accorded to critical categories such as death penalty, life imprisonment, family, tax, and service matters, yielding tangible results. As of November 2024, the SC had pending before it the oldest death sentence case from 2016, a life imprisonment case from 2015, a family case from 2019, a tax case from 2002, and a service case from 2014.
Currently, the SC is hearing death sentence cases from 2025, life imprisonment cases from 2023, family cases from 2025, tax cases from 2025, and service cases from 2024.
However, the court’s statement did not mention that the number of judges increased from 17 in October last year to 24. The tenure of two ad hoc judges ended in late July. Nor did it provide any data regarding the performance of constitutional benches.
The press release stated that “to strengthen judicial governance, the Secretariat of the Supreme Judicial Council was established alongside the notification of its Secretariat Service Rules, 2025”.
“While the Council had decided 71 complaints between 2021 and 2024, it disposed of 130 complaints in the past year alone — a testament to the judiciary’s renewed commitment to efficiency, transparency, and institutional excellence.”
“Similarly, the Secretariat of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan was established, and the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (Appointment of Judges) Rules, 2024 were notified. Given that the last appointments to the Lahore High Court were made in July 2021, the High Court of Sindh in April 2023, the Peshawar High Court in July 2022, the High Court of Balochistan in July 2022, and the Islamabad High Court in December 2021, the Judicial Commission held 31 meetings during the past year and recommended 53 judges for appointment — marking a significant revitalisation of the judicial appointments process.”
The statement also noted that under the Access to Justice Development Fund (AJDF), record disbursements amounting to Rs1.64 billion — more than the total distributed in the past two decades — were made.
A federal grant of Rs2 billion was secured to support solarization, e-libraries, women-centric facilities, and water filtration plants across all districts by August 2026. Additionally, Rs125 million were allocated for capacity-building initiatives and Rs13.8 million were earmarked to extend free legal aid coverage to the SC and high courts.
‘Undefined meanings’
Advocate Abdul Moiz Jaferii remarked that although, following former CJP Qazi Faez Isa’s tenure, there was a general consensus that the apex court’s trajectory could only move upward, the executive, teaming up with like-minded judges, has proven that assumption wrong.
“The last year has seen justice delivered selectively, through benches made by the government, comprised of judges appointed by the government, who have dutifully given decisions for the government. We are at a pass where the idea of access to justice and the rule of law have tenuous and undefined meanings. Ask the government, and it will tell you that things never have been better. Ask the people, and whatever they say doesn’t really matter,” he said.
“Because that’s what this is really all about. As Akram Sheikh said to Justice Mazhar when asked what the case against the 26th amendment was really about, his answer summed up the performance of the executive and the judiciary over the past year. There was an election. A party alleged rigging. Every attempt to investigate and undo that rigging thereafter has seen the executive team up with the Supreme Court to thwart it.”
Advocate Rida Hosain also criticised the CJP’s self-assessment, saying, “The chief justice’s self-congratulatory press release overlooks the reality that public confidence in the judiciary’s credibility and legitimacy is at one of its lowest points”.
“The chief justice speaks of transparency and judicial independence. Yet, under the new Code of Conduct, judges are now prohibited from publicly discussing administrative or judicial matters. This is not transparency – judges are being censored under the guise of maintaining institutional order. In the face of threats to judicial independence, the message the Chief Justice has conveyed to his fellow judges is that speech will be controlled, and public engagement will be restricted,” she said.
Rida further stated that “in the past year, the CJP consented to the transfer of judges to the Islamabad High Court facilitating the sidelining of independent judges”.
She noted that the CJP failed to list the 26th Amendment petitions before a full court despite the committee’s clear decision under the Practice and Procedure law.
“New methods for intimidation were created by issuing a general standing order requiring judges to disclose their address and contact details while on leave or vacation. Far from strengthening judicial independence, the chief justice’s actions have gravely diminished the institution’s independence.”
Advocate Hafiz Ehsaan Ahmad noted that “during the past one year, the Supreme Court has taken several constructive steps to improve its functioning, including amendments in its rules, digital transformation, and enhanced focus on criminal and tax jurisdictions”.
He said these were “positive developments that reflect a gradual movement toward modernisation and accessibility,” but added that “much more still needs to be done to strengthen public confidence in the apex judiciary”.
He emphasised that as the ultimate constitutional forum and custodian of fundamental rights. the court must ensure that every petition receives its first hearing within 15 days of institution as envisaged under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023.
He said that “equal, patient, and fair hearing to both parties and the delivery of well-reasoned and timely judgments are vital to ensure justice and maintain the court’s institutional credibility”.
Hafiz Ehsaan also noted that the reversal of recently increased filing fees by the SC on the request of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) was “a welcome and just step”. The earlier increase, he argued, had “imposed an excessive financial burden on litigants and risked restricting access to justice for ordinary citizens”.
He stressed that bench composition should be guided by judicial specialisation, saying, “Cases relating to tax, criminal, and civil matters should be assigned to benches comprising judges with proven expertise in those areas, ensuring efficiency, technical soundness, and quality of judgments”.
Likewise, for constitutional and public importance cases, the bench should include judges representing diverse legal backgrounds to ensure collective wisdom, balanced interpretation, and institutional harmony in the court’s jurisprudence.
He further underscored that constitutional benches must function “in a continuous, transparent, and rule-based manner,” with fixation and composition made transparent and objective. “Internal differences among judges should be addressed through proper institutional mechanisms and not brought into the public domain, as such exposure undermines judicial unity and institutional dignity,” he said.
“The amended Code of Conduct approved by the Supreme Judicial Council must be adhered to in letter and spirit,” Hafiz added, “particularly regarding restraint in public engagement, timely issuance of judgments, and maintenance of decorum.”
He noted that while “positive reforms have been initiated, the public’s expectations remain high, and the SC must continue its journey of self-correction and modernisation to ensure justice without delay, procedural transparency, and institutional harmony, thereby positioning Pakistan’s judiciary among the most respected and credible judicial systems of the world”.
