Judges’ transfer may affect constitutional balance: CJP

Published
0

• Questions institutional necessity for proposed transfers, warns against far-reaching implications
• Allows JCP secretary to proceed with requisition

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi, who also serves as Chairperson of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP), has cautioned that transferring Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro from the Islamabad High Court (IHC) to the Sindh High Court (SHC) could undermine key constitutional principles, particularly federalism and equitable representation.

In his response to informal requests by IHC Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, the CJP warned that such transfers would reduce judicial appointments to temporary, reversible administrative decisions rather than constitutionally grounded placements.

The IHC chief justice had requested a JCP meeting on April 28 to consider transferring five judges from the IHC to other high courts.

The proposed transfers included Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kiani to the Lahore High Court, Justice Babar Sattar to the Peshawar High Court, Justice Arbab Tahir to the Balochistan High Court, and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz and Justice Soomro to the SHC. Although the CJP had earlier declined these suggestions, an undated requisition signed by five JCP members was submitted to the JCP secretariat on April 7.

Under Article 175A(22) of the Consti­tution, the JCP chairman is required to convene a meeting within 15 days if at least one-third of members submit a requisition.

While raising substantive objections to the proposed transfers, CJP warned that the move would affect constitutional balance and have far-reaching implications.

Referring specifically to Justice Soomro, who had been transferred from the SHC to the IHC in February 2025 under Article 200, the CJP argued that reversing such a transfer defeats the purpose of promoting federalism, inclusivity, and equitable representation in the superior judiciary. He noted that the earlier transfers were made with careful consideration of linguistic diversity and representation of federating units.

The CJP warned that moving both Justice Soomro and Justice Imtiaz back to the SHC would leave Sindh without representation in the IHC, thereby negating the intent behind earlier judicial placements.

He also questioned the institutional ne­­cessity behind the proposed transfers, noting the absence of any stated reasons. Wi­­thout justification, such moves could as­­su­­me a punitive character, effectively amo­unting to the removal of judges without due process. He emphasised that tra­ns­ferring five out of nine IHC judges wi­­thout replacing them would create signi­ficant vacancies, potentially leading to fresh appointments and further instability.

Highlighting the broader implications, the CJP said such large-scale transfers could create judicial uncertainty and erode public trust in the administration of justice. He stressed that the Constitution provides a clear mechanism under Article 209 for addressing allegations or concerns against judges through the Supreme Judicial Council.

According to the CJP, any transfer that effectively functions as a removal from office cannot bypass this constitutional framework. Allowing such actions would enable what the Constitution explicitly prohibits: removing judges through indirect administrative means rather than established legal procedures.

He said that permitting such transfers would set a dangerous precedent, normalising the idea that judges are interchangeable or disposable. This, he said, would harm judicial independence, institutional integrity, and public trust. He stated that the proposed transfers, due to their apparent punitive nature and lack of justification, were inconsistent with the constitutional scheme governing the judiciary and the intent of Article 200.

For these reasons, he added, the requisition to convene a JCP meeting for the transfers could not be supported. How­ever, he clarified that the JCP secretary may still proceed with convening the me­­eting in compliance with Article 175A(22), as required by the Constitution.

Published in Dawn, April 25th, 2026

Opinion

Editorial

Kashmir unresolved
Updated 30 Sep, 2026

Kashmir unresolved

The just solution lies in India addressing the issue through a trilateral dialogue involving the legitimate representatives of the Kashmiri people and Pakistan.
Water shortage
30 Sep, 2026

Water shortage

THAT the country is entering the Rabi season with an anticipated water shortage of nearly 25pc, the lowest carryover...
Young hearts
30 Sep, 2026

Young hearts

THE observance may have passed, but the message of World Heart Day should not fade with it. The occasion is a useful...
Terror and politics
Updated 29 Sep, 2026

Terror and politics

There is an urgent need to tone down the rhetoric and tackle terrorism as a collective challenge for both the affected provinces and the federation.
Watching the glaciers
29 Sep, 2026

Watching the glaciers

THE latest signs from Pakistan’s mountains are worrying. Suparco says the number of unfrozen glacial lakes it...
Dangerous agenda
29 Sep, 2026

Dangerous agenda

AS the world remains fixated on the US-Iran conflict, elsewhere in the Middle East, Israel is consolidating its grip...