Islamabad High Court judges have sparked concern after five of them filed petitions against their own chief justice. The move has highlighted internal divisions and raised questions about judicial unity in Pakistan. Their actions also revealed deep frustration with how the IHC is being run.
READ MORE:PM Shehbaz calls Trump ‘champion of peace’ as Gaza talks heat up
Traditionally, disagreements among judges were handled quietly within courts. This helped protect collegiality and preserve public confidence. However, the public filing of these petitions through the Supreme Court has broken this tradition. The unusual scenes have fueled debate over the state of judicial discipline.
Critics believe the petitions could have been filed through lawyers. But observers argue that the judges wanted to send a stronger message. Their complaints suggest a lack of trust in the IHC chief justice and doubts about receiving fair treatment. The pending petitions remain unlisted for hearing, adding to uncertainty.
Commentators stress that timely mediation and compromise could have resolved these disputes. They also argue that senior judicial leaders, including the chief justice of Pakistan, should play a stronger role. Without quick resolution, tensions risk damaging the judiciary’s credibility and eroding public trust in the system.
READ MORE:Supreme Judicial Council Sole Authority Over Judges’ Misconduct, Rules SC
Since Islamabad High Court judges play a critical role in reviewing federal actions, this ongoing rift could paralyze justice. Experts urge the Supreme Court to step in, mediate, and rebuild consensus. Without unity, the conflict among Islamabad High Court judges may harm both the judiciary and the nation.