Hope is a powerful force, driving people toward a better future. One such hope is the swift dispensation of justice, as delays in justice are often equated with its denial.
Currently, around 57,000 cases are pending before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, with an additional 2.4 million awaiting resolution in other courts across the country. According to the office of the registrar, 27,312 cases were fixed and 12,109 disposed of between 28 Oct 2024 and 7 March 2025 while 7,370 new cases were instituted in the same period.
Given this backlog, Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi’s commitment to judicial reforms has rekindled hope. His vision focuses on modernising the judiciary to uphold fairness, transparency and accessibility – ensuring that the justice system remains citizen-centric and responsive to litigants’ needs.
As part of these reforms, advanced information technology has reportedly been integrated to enhance judicial efficiency. Initiatives such as e-Affidavit system is meant to streamline filing processes, reduce delays and improve transparency, while a Case Management System allows litigants and lawyers to access certified copies instantly, eliminating human interference. To further public trust, feedback mechanisms involving legal practitioners, litigants and civil society have also been introduced.
However, despite these pronounced reforms, the harsh reality remains unchanged – justice is still delayed. Cases continue to languish in courts for years, and multiple First Information Reports (FIRs) on identical charges are often registered against individuals in different jurisdictions, undermining fundamental rights.
In his effort to reform the judiciary, the Chief Justice has engaged with key stakeholders, including the Prime Minister, Bar Councils, Bar Associations, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and a delegation from Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). Discussions have revolved around critical issues such as the implementation of court orders, abuse of legal processes, human rights violations and concerns over the 26th Constitutional Amendment’s adverse impact.
Key topics also included: military trials of civilians, non-implementation of production orders regarding missing persons, threats received by PTI lawyers, controversial role of intelligence agencies, judicial transfers affecting the independence of the courts, etc.
Despite previous Chief Justices expressing similar commitments to reducing case delays – through utilising technology to link branch registries with the Principal Seat for real-time hearings – the situation remains largely unchanged. The implementation gap continues to frustrate litigants and legal practitioners alike.
At the core of justice lies the principle of the Rule of Law, which is inseparable from an independent judiciary. John Rawls, a renowned Harvard philosopher, described justice as “the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought.” Today, justice and the Rule of Law are synonymous, as fundamental rights are meaningless without strict legal enforcement.
However, in Pakistan, scant respect for the Constitution and Rule of Law is evident. Over the past two years, Supreme Court judgments have often gone unenforced, and citizens have been deprived of their liberty without due process. This failure not only exposes the inefficiency of the judicial system but also raises broader concerns about governance.
John Marshall, the fourth Chief Justice of the United States, once stated: “The very essence of civil liberty consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws whenever he receives an injury. One of the first duties of government is to afford that protection.”
Unfortunately, in Pakistan, this fundamental principle is frequently violated. Judicial orders remain unimplemented, and legal protections are selectively applied. As a result, people continue to look toward the Supreme Court for justice under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, which allows the Court to take suo motu notice of fundamental rights violations.
One of the most pressing concerns affecting judicial independence is the 26th Constitutional Amendment, which has significantly altered the balance of power in judicial appointments. This amendment has given the executive branch greater influence over judicial postings and transfers, undermining the separation of powers.
The transfer of judges from one High Court to another now acts as a Sword of Damocles, threatening judicial independence. Judges who rule against the interests of the powerful risk being transferred as a punitive measure, discouraging bold and impartial decision-making
Judicial reforms cannot succeed unless the negative impacts of the 26th Amendment are reviewed. A truly independent judiciary requires a clear separation from the executive branch. Without this, reforms will remain mere rhetoric.
The real test of any Supreme Court lies in its ability to enforce fundamental rights. If the judiciary cannot protect citizens from injustice, no amount of technological advancements or procedural improvements will restore public trust. Therefore, for judicial reforms to be meaningful, they must begin with strengthening judicial independence and the Rule of Law.
#Judicial #reforms #CJP
Leave a Reply