SHCBA opposes transfer of three IHC judges

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA) has strongly opposed the transfer of three judges of the Islamabad High Court, warning that the move risks undermining judicial independence and constitutional safeguards. In a detailed statement, the association criticised a decision taken by the Judicial Commission of Pakistan on April 28, saying the judges were transferred without their consent, without being provided reasons, and without being given an opportunity of hearing. The SHCBA office holders included its President Muhammad Haseeb Jamali, Vice President Tarique Ali Jakhrani, Honorary Secretary Fareeda Mangrio, Honorary Treasurer Syed Naimatullah Shah, Honorary Joint Secretary Huzaifa Khan, Honorary Additional Joint Secretary Roop Mala Singh Rajput. Members Managing Committee Nasira Brohi, Abdul Wahab Bhutto, Khalid Hussain Shar, Mubammad Atif Azad, Dr Shariq Naveed, Imran Taj, Muhammad Farid Bilwani Memon, Rukhsana Umar and Sri Chand Oad. Ex-officio Barrister Muhammad Sarfaraz Ali Metlo (former President) and Mirza Sarfaraz Ahmed (former Hon. Secretary). READ MORE: Acting president approves transfer of three IHC judges The SHCBA said the process violated established principles of natural justice, particularly the right to be heard, describing it as “arbitrary, opaque and legally unsustainable. ” The judges affected include Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kiani, Justice Babar Sattar and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz, who were transferred to the Lahore High Court, Peshawar High Court and Sindh High Court, respectively. The bar association said the transfers were carried out in haste and lacked transparency, raising serious questions about the criteria and intent behind the decision. It further alleged that the move could be perceived as punitive, noting that the judges had previously raised concerns over alleged interference in judicial matters. Referring to constitutional provisions, the SHCBA said the transfers appeared to violate Article 200, which recommends that judges should be heard before such decisions are made. It also criticised recent amendments to Articles 200 and 209, arguing that they introduce coercive elements by linking refusal of transfer to potential disciplinary proceedings. “These provisions effectively transform a constitutional safeguard into an instrument of compulsion, ” the statement said, adding that such measures could exert pressure on the judiciary and erode the balance of power between state institutions. The association warned that weakening judicial independence could have broader implications for the rule of law and public confidence in the legal system. It said the judiciary plays a central role in protecting fundamental rights and maintaining checks on executive authority, and any erosion of its autonomy would undermine constitutional governance. The SHCBA also pointed to deliberations at an All Pakistan Lawyers Convention held on April 27, where participants rejected the recent constitutional amendments affecting judicial appointments and transfers. Calling the developments a “direct affront” to constitutional principles, the bar body urged relevant institutions to review the decision and ensure that judicial independence, due process and security of tenure are fully protected. It also warned that if such practices continue, judges may find it difficult to perform their duties without fear or favour, potentially weakening the justice system. The statement concluded with a demand for immediate corrective measures to reverse the transfers and uphold the principles of natural justice and constitutional supremacy. Copyright Business Recorder, 2026

Read full story on Business Recorder