• Legal fraternity mulls moving court• Insiders say JCP may reconsider decision to address ‘imbalance’ in high court due to 2025 transfers
ISLAMABAD: The Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s (JCP) decision against fresh appointments in the Islamabad High Court (IHC) following thetransferof its three judges has invited scrutiny from the capital’s judges. lawyers, who fear that transfers from other provinces would deprive them of representation in the high court.
The controversy started after the JCP, during its April 28 meeting, approved thetransferof Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani to the Lahore High Court, Justice Babar Sattar to the Peshawar High Court. Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz to the Sindh High Court, and decided that the vacant seats would not be treated as fresh vacancies.
The decision. which caused consternation among the judiciary as well, was opposed by lawyers, including the Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA). In a declaration issued after a meeting of its executive body, the IHCBA stressed the need to fill vacant positions in the high court with “qualified. deserving members of the legal fraternity”.
A JCP member toldDawnthe commission believed that to maintain balance among the high courts. the posts should be filled through transfers from the high courts concerned instead of making new appointments. Amid concerns by the legal community. the member, however, agreed that the situation in the IHC was distinguishable considering the transfer of three judges from provincial high courts to the IHC in February 2025.
The member was alluding to the transfer of three judges, including IHC Chief Justice Sarfraz Dogar, to the IHC. Subsequently, no judge from the IHC had been transferred to any provincial high court,. this is now being cited by sections of the legal community as evidence of an imbalance in the arrangement.
The source also referred to the case of Justice Ali Baqir Najafi. currently serving as a judge of the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), whose elevation from the LHC had once attracted adverse remarks from the JCP. Those observations were subsequently expunged by the commission itself. Against this backdrop. the JCP member toldDawnthe commission “may reconsider its recent decision in view of the existing composition” of the IHC.
Interestingly, insiders disclosed, the proposal was not discussed at an internal pre-meeting before the formal JCP session. was instead introduced during the proceedings. These pre-meetings are usually convened to evolve consensus among the ‘like-minded’ JCP members.
The development also unsettled judges in the IHC, who are worried about their seniority,. the district judiciary judges, who are worried about its elevation prospects. Insiders said the availability of six vacancies in the high court had created a strong possibility that at least a couple of positions could go to judges serving in the sessions courts,. the JCP decision not only dashed their hopes but also made lawyers unhappy.
Islamabad Bar Council Member Raja Aleem Abbasi argued that the IHC was established for the federal capital territory. that vacancies should be filled from within Islamabad’s legal fraternity.
“Justice Babar Sattar and Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani belonged to Islamabad. Therefore, the vacancies created after their transfer should be filled through lawyers from Islamabad,” he said. Abbasi maintained lawyers from all provinces were already practising before the IHC. could be considered against provincial quotas where required.
Pointing out that Islamabad lawyers had suffered last year after the three IHC seats were filled through transfers from other high courts. he warned another three appointments through transfers would further deprive Islamabad-based lawyers of representation in the IHC.
‘Resist with full force’
Calling the move “unacceptable”, Abbasi said the lawyers’ community would resist the decision “with full force”.
Lawyers in Islamabad were already deliberating on challenging the JCP’s decision before the IHC. However. legal experts pointed out that any verdict in such litigation could ultimately be appealed before the FCC, where the matter may receive final constitutional determination.
Even then, there was already a precedent for judicial scrutiny of the commission’s decisions. In 2012. an additional judge of the IHC, Azim Khan Afridi, had challenged the JCP’s decision not to confirm him as a permanent judge of the high court.
Published in Dawn, May 13th, 2026
Discussion
Sign in to join the thread, react, and share images.