“In a country where the odds of the judicial system is skewed, a few brave judges exhibit courage and work diligently to bring the balance back toward fairness.”
Recently, the ongoing friction between Pakistan’s judiciary and state institutions has been exacerbated as some judges are now raising concerns about alleged interference by these institutions in the judicial affairs of the country. This remarkable shift indicates a potential transformation in the political dynamics of the state, which has been traditionally dominated by certain institutions. For instance, a significant change in the judiciary’s behavior can be witnessed through the recent developments in the ongoing legal battles against former Prime Minister Imran Khan.
Imran Khan, who was a famous cricketer in Pakistan, stepped into politics in the mid-1990s and turned into a populist politician. In 2023, he got trapped in a web of legal proceedings that many claimed were politically motivated. For example, the sitting regime has accused Khan of selling state gifts, marrying without fulfilling Islamic legal requirements, and mismanaging diplomatic cables. These cases, which have put him behind bars, are not just legal battles; rather, they signal an ongoing struggle for power between the judiciary and other powerful institutions of Pakistan.
A New Chapter in Pakistan’s History
Recently, the judges of Islamabad High Court have raised their voices regarding the alleged interference of dominant powers in judicial procedures, raising a beacon of hope among Khan’s supporters. In April 2024, the Toshakhana case against Khan was suspended by the court, and it also withdrew the diplomatic cable case filed against him in the last week of the same month. Nevertheless, one case against Khan is still pending (the claim that Khan wed Bushra Bibi too soon after her divorce) and the legal experts consider it to be the flimsiest among all other cases.
Abdul Moiz Jaferii, a legal expert aptly explained this case as a “tired and desperate” move to ruin the reputation of Khan in a conservative Islamic state. However, following the judiciary’s new trend, the Iddat case is expected to seek positive outcomes for the former prime minister, as there is a high probability that the case might be either significantly altered or overturned.
These judicial actions reflect the dawn of an independent judiciary in Pakistan that stands in stark contrast with the traditional judicial system. Asma Shirazi, a journalist, who has covered Pakistani politics for over two decades, explains, “There is a power struggle between Pakistan’s judiciary and state’s institutions and the power of these institutions is significantly hurtling towards the judiciary, and in which Khan has appeared as a dominant player.”
The Judiciary’s Resistance
However, the judges handling Khan’s cases have received alleged threats in recent months. They detailed incidents of abductions, torture, and secret surveillance in an explosive letter to Pakistan’s Supreme Court. For example, Malik Shahzad Ahmad, the chief justice of Lahore High Court, addressed an event in the garrison city of Rawalpindi and claimed that he received several complaints, some verbally and some through letters regarding the interference by “institutions” in judicial matters. He asserted, “I’m hopeful that the interference of certain institutions in the judicial matters will soon come to its end.”
Other than this, six judges of the Islamabad High Court alleged that “intimidation tactics” have been used by the country’s institutions in order to compel them into ruling against Khan. Shahid Maitla, a political analyst says, “Every individual and institution has a threshold to absorb coercion.” He further adds, “Beyond that, it ends in revolt.”
These allegations mark a turning point in the legal history of Pakistan. For the first time, several judges have collectively accused institutions of such flagrant misconduct. A professor of international relations at the National University of Modern Languages (NUML), Tahir Naeem Malik, noted that “these allegations have been documented as well as brought on record. Now this issue needs to be addressed immediately without further delay.”
The Future: Predicting Judicial Assertiveness?
The result of Khan’s trials will serve as a litmus test for the judiciary’s autonomy. If the courts are able to overturn the final case against him, it could be an indication of a new era of judicial assertiveness in Pakistan which could ultimately undermine military dominance over the country’s legal system.
Sayed Zulfikar Bukhari, a close associate of Khan, emphasized that in order to prevent further destabilization, Khan’s release must be tackled carefully. He further added that “Imran Khan coming out with all this public support has an added responsibility to maturely handle the political system.” Conversely, there is still a fear that if Khan is liberated with judicial support, he might challenge or even take the whole country’s apparatus under his control. According to Asma Shirazi, “Khan may even take over the entire state machinery if he is freed.”
Conclusion
Therefore, currently, Pakistan is in a dire situation. The state’s judiciary has recently opposed the dominance of certain institutions. Now, this step could either bring about true judicial autonomy or escalate further instability in the state. This poses a serious threat to the democracy of Pakistan as well as Khan’s future. Whether the judiciary maintains its newly acquired independence will be determined in the coming months. Undoubtedly, Imran Khan’s legal struggles are not over yet; their outcome will have deep-seated impacts on Pakistan’s political sphere. Hitherto, a more practical strategy that upholds judicial independence while attempting to avoid direct confrontation may open the door to a more just distribution of power.
If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please check the Submissions page.
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.
