Staff Report
ISLAMABAD: Following the transfer of Islamabad High Court (IHC) judges to provincial high courts, the country’s top judicial authorities have given a nod to the rotation of judges of the subordinate judiciary to provinces.
Lawyers in the federal capital had been demanding such a mechanism for more than a decade, arguing that Islamabad’s district judiciary should have the same opportunities for inter-provincial transfers and rotations available to judges in other provinces.
The National Judicial Policy Making Committee (NJPMC) has now accepted the demand in principle and decided to introduce inter-provincial rotation of judges of the Islamabad district judiciary, with the mechanism expected to be implemented soon. The development comes after sustained demands from the legal fraternity for greater institutional balance in the district judiciary. In May, the Islamabad High Court Bar Association had formally called for a uniform transfer and rotation policy for the district judiciary, saying Islamabad’s judges should be given equal opportunities for inter-provincial transfers to promote professional harmony and balance within the judicial system.
The bar also maintained that Islamabad had a distinct constitutional and institutional identity and raised a number of broader issues concerning representation of the federal capital in national bar bodies.
Lawyers in Islamabad have welcomed the NJPMC’s decision, viewing it as an important step towards improving transparency, institutional balance and public confidence in the administration of justice.
The Islamabad Bar Council has also expressed gratitude to Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Yahya Afridi and the NJPMC for accepting its longstanding demand.
However, the proposed rotation policy has also generated apprehensions within the district judiciary.
Some judicial officers have expressed concerns that frequent movement of judges between Islamabad and other provinces could create new pressures on the subordinate judiciary. According to these concerns, lawyers may attempt to exert influence on judges for favourable orders and could even threaten protests or other forms of pressure against judges perceived as “non-cooperative”.
The apprehensions have raised questions about how the rotation policy will be structured and implemented while ensuring judicial independence and protection of judges from external pressure.
The challenge for the judicial authorities will therefore be to strike a balance between the legitimate demand for a transparent and uniform rotation mechanism and the need to ensure that district judges can perform their duties independently without fear of professional or external pressure.
