Daily Times

A strong state is like a building whose strength relies on three pillars: the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. If even one of these pillars weakens, the state itself becomes fragile. Just as buildings require renovation over time, similarly, reforms in state institutions are of paramount importance.

Unfortunately, our judicial system has become so outdated that it takes years to deliver justice. Plaintiffs’ properties get sold off while their cases linger in court for years. Over 50% of our problems stem from the fact that we lag far behind the rest of the world in delivering justice.

Consider this: according to the 2024 report by the Law and Justice Commission, the number of pending cases has exceeded 2.26 million. It takes not months but several years, sometimes over a decade, to reach a verdict. The report states that there was a 3.9% increase in pending cases in the last six months of 2023. Of the total pending cases, 82% are in district courts, while 18% are in the higher judiciary.

Our judiciary ranks 130th globally, and questioning this system often leads to charges of contempt of court. This raises the question: Is the judicial system so unprofessional? Is there a lack of competence or issues in appointments? There must be some reason.

Our judicial system has become so outdated that it takes years to deliver justice.

Numerous public interest cases have been on stay orders for years. Look at the sugar issue or the recent initiative by the Punjab government to provide bikes to students. Whether in educational matters or real estate cases, stay orders persist everywhere. When a case is delayed, it affects not just 5 or 6 people, but entire families.

Naturally, with the judiciary in such a state, people will raise questions. Now, if anyone questions the competence of judges or the outdated judicial system, they face contempt of court charges. Take the case of Faisal Vawda, for instance. It wasn’t just his issue but a matter concerning the entire Pakistani nation. His fault was daring to represent the nation by questioning a judge’s dual nationality and appointment, which was deemed disrespectful.

It’s time for judicial reforms in Pakistan, or the poor masses and this nation will continue to suffer at the hands of courts and judges.

The most crucial reform needed is to revisit the appointment process of judges. The Chief Justice of the relevant High Court recommends names for High Court judges, but there are no specific standards for these recommendations. These names then go to the Judicial Commission, which either approves them or sends them back for review. The commission has a majority of judges, diminishing the importance of the bar council, executive, and other stakeholders.

The commission should have equal representation from the judiciary, bar council, parliament, and executive to ensure that no single group can dominate and suppress others’ opinions, leading to consensus-based appointments in the country’s higher courts.

A systematic and transparent method for appointing judges is essential, which includes evaluating their educational qualifications, asset investigations, and psychological and mental assessments to improve the standards of our judiciary.

The writer is an old Aitchisonian who believes in freedom of expression, a freelance columnist, entrepreneur and social activist.