ISLAMABAD: Infighting bet­ween factions of the legal community over the present composition of the Supreme Court after the 26th Amendment to the Constitution, refuses to subside.

On Friday, the All-Pakistan Law­yers Action Committee (APLAC), which consists of former Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) presidents, issued a statement rebuking what it called “a misleading and factually inaccurate press statement” issued by the present leadership of the SCBA and the Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA) on Thursday.

A day ago, the SCBA condemned APLAC’s demand to form a constitutional bench comprising all apex court judges.

It is imperative to clarify that the SCBA statement was riddled with baseless assertions, the latest statement said, adding the claim that the members endorsing the APLAC statement were “unelected representatives” was false.

Lawyers’ action committee rebukes SCBA for endorsing ‘executive control over apex court’

The signatories such as Abid S. Zuberi, Tahir Faraz Abbassi, Munir Kakar, Shafqat Mehmood Chohan, Maqsood Buttar, Asad Manzoor Butt, Riasat Ali Azad, Salman Mansoor, Haider Imam, Rahib Buledi, Naeem Qureshi, Abdul Hafeez Lashari, and Rehman Korai were elected and have been office bearers of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) and various bar associations across the country, APLAC said.

Any attempt to discredit their legitimacy is not only unwarranted but also detrimental to the unity of the legal profession, APLAC statement said.

It is essential to underscore that all members of the PBC the SCBA, whet­her previously elected or currently serving, were “representatives of the legal fraternity” chosen through democratic processes, it added.

“Their voices are rooted in the tru­st and confidence of the legal commu­nity, and to undermine their legitimacy is to challenge the very principles of democracy and representation that the bar associations stand for.”

‘Endorsing executive control’

APLAC said the SCBA has been “an institution that stood for the rule of law and judicial independence”.

“It is, therefore, deeply regrettable that the current SCBA leadership has chosen to disregard the contributions of its former presidents and legal luminaries.”

“Let us remind SCBA leadership of a fundamental truth: once a President, always a President. SCBA is not merely an organisation — it is an institution that represents the collective prestige of lawyers across Pa­k­i­stan,” the statement emphasised.

APLAC said the SCBA had end­orsed the “executive-dominated ext­e­n­sion of the Constitutional Bench”, ignoring “historical lessons” which undermines judicial independence.

During the Lawyers’ Movement of 2007, it was precisely such executive interference that led to a judicial crisis, APLAC added.

The 26th Constitutional Amend­ment and its implementation by an executive-dominated Judicial Com­m­ission “directly violate the constitutional principle of judicial independence enshrined in Article 175(3) of the Constitution”.

The SCBA’s “failure” to recognise this constitutional breach is both “disappointing and alarming”.

The APLAC also reiterated its demand for a full court bench to hear petitions challenging the 26th Amendment.

“This demand is not a matter of politics but a constitutional necessity to ensure public confidence in the judiciary’s independence.”

Published in Dawn, December 28th, 2024