SBC divided on establishment of federal constitutional court

karachi: The Sindh Bar Council (SBC) is divided over the judicial reform package aimed at establishing a federal constitutional court, with the council’s executive committee on the one hand voicing support for it, while the SBC vice chairman on the other hand expressing concern over the timing and secrecy surrounding the proposed constitutional package and its implications.

In a press release regarding the judicial reform package, SBC Vice Chairman Kashif Hanif said that any major structural change to the judicial system, which could have significant consequences for the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary, requires full transparency, serious discussion and consultation with all the stakeholders.

Hanif raised questions about the merits and demerits of creating a new court, the nature and extent of its jurisdiction, and how this new court would function within the existing judicial framework. He also questioned how the chief justice and other judges would be appointed to both the old and new courts, both initially and subsequently.

“What will happen to existing and new cases? Can equal representation of the federating units address any imbalances in the judicial system? How will conflicts of jurisdiction between the old and new courts be resolved?” he asked.

“Will the proposals genuinely resolve the issues within our judicial system, or will they exacerbate them? These are matters that require input from all stakeholders, especially the bar, once the political parties share their detailed drafts of any constitutional amendments.”

He lamented that previous attempts to hastily push through a constitutional package were unsuccessful, and none of the parties in the ruling coalition have shared a draft of their proposed amendments. He emphasised that speeches and press conferences cannot replace the need for detailed drafts, transparent consultation, consensus-building and a proper feedback process.

He described the current approach as anti-democratic, suggesting that it creates the impression that the proposed constitutional package is not a genuine reform but rather a response to the establishment’s dissatisfaction with certain verdicts from a pliant judiciary with aligned judges. He noted that the urgency to expedite this process raises concerns that it is person-specific legislation aimed at benefiting one individual.

“The lawyers of Pakistan will support any genuine, consultative process of judicial reform but will not accept any attempts to undermine the independence of the judiciary under the guise of reform.”

Meanwhile, the SBC’s executive committee said in its resolution that the legal fraternity fully understands the importance of these long-awaited reforms and welcomes the merger of the judicial commission and the parliamentary committee, which will facilitate a larger forum for the selection of judges to the high courts, the Supreme Court and the federal constitutional courts.

The committee said that judicial reform through constitutional amendment will strengthen the federation and empower the courts to effectively address the fundamental rights of the people.

“The SBC calls upon all the stakeholders to consult, discuss and debate judicial reforms in a holistic manner, ensuring that the entire legal fraternity is taken into account for the greater good of the country,” they said.

The executive committee highlighted that judicial delays in the adjudication of disputes, or the lack of adjudication between provinces or the federal government, have created an urgent need for reform in the current situation.