Supreme Court Reinforces Judicial Oversight in Judge Transfer Process

Supreme Court: Judicial Approval Mandatory at Four Stages in Judge Transfer Process

Islamabad – The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Monday stressed that judicial approval is essential at four separate stages in the process of transferring judges, underlining the need to preserve judicial independence and maintain seniority structures within the judiciary.

A five-member constitutional bench, led by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, heard the case regarding constitutional matters linked to the transfer of judges. The hearing raised significant concerns about judicial independence, the role of constitutional articles, and the seniority of judges.

Lawyer Faisal Siddiqi, presenting his arguments, stated that the Islamabad High Court was established under Article 175 of the Constitution. He emphasised that current laws regarding judicial appointments apply only to the provinces and therefore do not support the transfer of judges to the Islamabad High Court under the existing legal framework.

Siddiqi further argued that any such transfer should not be considered permanent, and judges do not need to retake their oath upon returning. He claimed that the current system of transfers undermines the authority of the Judicial Commission, violating the spirit of constitutional provisions.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar clarified the transfer process, explaining that it involves four key stages: approval from the chief justice of the originating high court, the chief justice of the receiving high court, the judge in question, and the chief justice of Pakistan. If any one of these parties disagrees, the transfer cannot proceed.

Justice Shakeel Ahmed noted that many disputes over judge transfers and appointments could be resolved by having a unified seniority list across the judiciary. Siddiqi concurred, adding that altering a seniority list built over decades using executive authority is a form of overreach.

Siddiqi concluded by alleging that the judiciary was kept uninformed about changes impacting seniority and that the law was manipulated in bad faith.

The hearing was adjourned until Tuesday, with Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan expected to continue his arguments.