Justice Mansoor seeks answers from CJP Afridi on six ‘pressing matters’

ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court Puisne Judge Justice Mansoor Ali Shah has written a letter to Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, raising six questions, including why a full court was not constituted to hear petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment.

In the seven-page letter, Justice Shah asked why a meeting of the Practice and Procedure Committee was not convened; why the Supreme Court Rules were approved through circulation instead of by a full court; why consultation was carried out individually to change the policy on issuing dissenting notes; why a general order was issued regarding judges’ vacations; why a full court was not formed to hear challenges to the 26th Amendment; and why, instead of giving judges independence, they were being treated as a “controlled force.”

Justice Shah wrote that he hoped “these questions would be answered at the ceremony marking the start of the new judicial year.” He urged the chief justice to respond publicly during the judicial conference on September 8. “As the most senior judge after you, I am writing this letter in discharge of my duty to the institution,” he noted.

He said that despite writing several letters, he had received neither a written nor verbal reply. “Your public response will reassure both the judges and the people, and affirm that your reforms are transparent and in line with the Constitution. Do not consider this a letter from a personally aggrieved or resentful individual,” he wrote.

Justice Shah further noted that during the chief justice’s tenure, he had disposed of 3,956 cases and authored 35 reported judgments.

“Since October 2024, not a single formal meeting of the Practice and Procedure Committee has been held. Benches are being constituted without consultation,” he said.

He added that benches were being formed and cause lists issued unilaterally, while rosters of judges were sent for signatures without prior consultation.

“Why are senior judges being assigned two-member benches while junior judges are given three-member benches? Why are cases of national importance not being fixed before senior judges? Senior judges are being sidelined to keep them under control,” the letter stated.

Earlier, Islamabad High Court (IHC) Judge Justice Babar Sattar wrote a letter to IHC Chief Justice Mohammad Sarfraz Dogar, sharply criticising his leadership and highlighting what he described as systemic “judicial ills” undermining the institution.

Also read: IHC suspends order to form blasphemy law commission

The letter, widely circulated among IHC judges, surfaced just ahead of a full court meeting convened to mark the beginning of the new judicial year, on Wednesday. The letter, reflective of internal dissent, signals rising tensions within the IHC as concerns mount over judicial independence, administrative irregularities, and the overall functioning of the court.