Five judges of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) have pushed back against a Supreme Court decision that upheld the transfer of three judges from provincial high courts to the IHC. They’ve filed a fresh appeal, arguing that the top court misinterpreted the Constitution and overlooked key legal principles.
The appeal comes just days ahead of a Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) meeting scheduled for July 1, where appointments for several high court chief justices are expected to be discussed.
The Supreme Court’s ruling, issued on June 19 by a 3-2 majority, had allowed the transfers of judges from Punjab, Sindh, and Balochistan to the IHC. It also asked the president to determine the seniority of the transferred judges based on their service records.
However, IHC Justices Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Babar Sattar, Sardar Ijaz Ishaq Khan, and Saman Rafat Imtiaz have now challenged that decision. They argue that the Constitution does not allow for permanent transfers of judges in the way the court described—and that the ruling gives too much power to the executive branch, undermining the independence of the judiciary.
The judges’ appeal says Article 200 of the Constitution only permits temporary transfers, not permanent ones. It also points out that the Islamabad High Court Act, 2010, only talks about appointing judges to the IHC—not transferring them from other provinces. They believe the Supreme Court’s reading of the law went too far by assuming language that isn’t actually in the text.
The appeal also warns that this interpretation weakens the role of the Judicial Commission under Article 175A, which is meant to safeguard judicial independence by ensuring appointments go through a transparent process.
The five judges have asked the Supreme Court not to treat the three transferred judges as members of the IHC until they retake their oaths under Article 194. Notably, one of them, Justice Dogar, is currently serving as the acting chief justice of the IHC.
