Article-300[Regarding our Our Hollow Judicial System ]

 *Article-300[Regarding our Our Hollow Judicial System ]

Note:-I originally wrote the article on the subject in Urdu in Article -109 of dated 14 January 2020 ,while I was  in Ottawa, Canada I am now publishing its English , on version  before my readers. 

In this article, I have not only discussed the weaknesses and hollowness of our judicial system, but I have also highlighted the injustice allegedly committed by PTCL and PTET against PTCL petitioner pensioners, and the manner in which, in my opinion, the judiciary appeared to support PTCL and PTET instead of ensuring justice for the petitioners.

Sadly, even today, the situation largely remains unchanged. The discriminatory and step-motherly treatment being shown toward PTCL petitioner pensioners is deeply painful and disappointing. Under the present circumstances, it has become extremely difficult for many affected pensioners to maintain confidence that the judiciary will provide them timely and complete justice.

Regards

(Muhammad Tariq Azhar)

Date: 9th June

⸻

Article-109 [Regarding A Hollow Judicial System — Where Even Expecting Timely and Fair Justice from the Highest Courts Appears Like a Dream]

Unfortunately, we are citizens of a country whose judicial system has gradually become hollow and ineffective. Speedy and lasting justice has become increasingly rare. Even decisions of the superior judiciary often appear to be influenced by pressure, influence, or external considerations.

There are situations where even judgments of the Supreme Court are not implemented in their true spirit, and at times the apex court itself appears unable to enforce its own decisions effectively. Delays in justice have become routine. More than ninety percent of ordinary citizens have little confidence in the judicial system and its outcomes.

Even minor cases continue for years. Hearing after hearing is fixed, and when proceedings are finally completed, judgments are often reserved for long periods. In many cases, litigants pass away while waiting for the announcement of reserved judgments.

While such delays are common in lower courts, the same tendency has unfortunately become increasingly visible even in the superior judiciary. People often say that one needs the lifespan of Prophet Noah merely to obtain a final judicial decision.At the same time, cases involving influence or pressure sometimes receive extraordinary urgency, with decisions being announced within a single day or even during court holidays. Such unequal treatment deeply damages public confidence in the rule of law.

It often appears that many judges have forgotten the moral and religious responsibilities attached to the office of justice. Instead of deciding cases solely on merit, law, and evidence, they sometimes appear to consider which party is more powerful or influential. This perception weakens faith in the judiciary.

Allah Almighty commands in the Holy Qur’an:

“Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due and when you judge between people, judge with justice.”

(Surah An-Nisa, Verse 58)

The Holy Prophet Muhammad ﷺ also stated that among the seven categories of people who will receive the shade of Allah on the Day of Judgment will be a just ruler or judge.

Justice means giving every person his rightful due. Islam places extraordinary emphasis upon justice because nations that uphold justice prosper with dignity, whereas societies deprived of justice ultimately decline and collapse.

The Holy Qur’an not only commands justice but also instructs believers not to abandon fairness due to personal interests, hatred, prejudice, or fear. In Surah Al-Ma’idah, Verse 8, Allah commands believers not to allow hostility toward others to prevent them from acting justly.

As Muslims, we are required to follow the commands of Allah and the teachings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ completely. Whenever we are in a position to decide matters affecting others, we must examine evidence, circumstances, and arguments honestly and provide justice without fear or favour.

Hazrat Ali (RA) famously said:

“A society may survive with disbelief, but it cannot survive with injustice.”

Justice delayed is itself injustice. Unfortunately, many judges in our country appear to have forgotten this principle.

The Historical objectionable Role of the Judiciary in Weakening Democracy, as In my opinion, the judiciary has played a major role in bringing Pakistan to its present condition. Had the superior judiciary consistently upheld constitutional principles without yielding to pressure, democracy would likely have flourished in Pakistan from the very beginning.

One of the earliest and most damaging examples occurred in the famous Maulvi Tamizuddin Khan case. Governor-General Ghulam Muhammad dissolved the Constituent Assembly and dismissed Khawaja Nazimuddin’s government by exercising powers under the Government of India Act, 1935.

Maulvi Tamizuddin challenged this action before the Sindh High Court, which restored the Assembly and set aside the Governor-General’s order. However, the Federal Court, headed by Chief Justice Justice Munir, reversed the Sindh High Court’s decision and validated the Governor-General’s actions.

That judgment laid the foundation for the infamous “Doctrine of Necessity,” which was later repeatedly used to legitimise unconstitutional actions and military takeovers.

Again, when General Ayub Khan imposed martial law in October 1958 after dismissing the constitutional government, the Supreme Court validated the martial law in the State v. Dosso case, once more strengthening dictatorship at the expense of democracy.

Later, Ayub Khan appointed Justice Munir as the country’s Law Minister. In my opinion, that single judgment caused immense long-term damage to Pakistan’s constitutional and democratic development.

After Ayub Khan’s resignation, power was handed to General Yahya Khan instead of being transferred through democratic elections. The country eventually suffered national disintegration in 1971. Yet the judiciary did not effectively challenge military rule during that period.

Similarly, when General Zia-ul-Haq imposed martial law on 5 July 1977 and removed the elected government of Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the Supreme Court once again validated martial law under the Doctrine of Necessity in the Begum Nusrat Bhutto case.

Chief Justice Yaqub Ali Khan, who initially admitted the constitutional petition challenging martial law, was effectively removed after the retirement age of judges was reduced through a martial law order. Justice Anwar-ul-Haq was then appointed Chief Justice.

Justice Anwar-ul-Haq later headed the bench that upheld the death sentence awarded to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

Again, in October 1999, General Pervez Musharraf overthrew an elected government and suspended the Constitution. Once more, the judiciary validated the unconstitutional takeover under the Doctrine of Necessity.

In return, after retirement, Chief Justice Irshad Hasan Khan was appointed Chief Election Commissioner during Musharraf’s regime.

In my opinion, repeated judicial validation of unconstitutional takeovers prevented democracy from maturing in Pakistan and encouraged military interventions throughout the country’s history.

Pressure on Judges and Declining Public Confidence.Many judges of the superior judiciary today appear to function under immense pressure from invisible or powerful forces. The fate of Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui of the Islamabad High Court is frequently cited as an example. After publicly speaking about alleged interference in judicial affairs, he was removed from office.

Under such circumstances, it becomes extremely difficult for judges to deliver bold and completely independent decisions.

In recent years, several controversial decisions of the superior judiciary have further weakened public confidence. At times, appellate courts have appeared to assume the role of trial courts, creating legal complications regarding the right of appeal.

High Courts and the Supreme Court are fundamentally appellate courts meant to hear appeals against judgments of lower courts. If the highest appellate court itself conducts proceedings resembling a trial, questions naturally arise regarding the availability of any further appellate remedy.

Nevertheless, it must also be acknowledged that Pakistan has produced several courageous and highly respected judges who stood firmly for constitutionalism and justice. Among such distinguished names are Justice A.R. Cornelius, Justice Dorab Patel, Justice Bhagwandas, Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim, and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah. In more recent years, names such as Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Shaukat Siddiqui have also frequently been associated with judicial independence.

Without such honourable exceptions, our judicial history would appear far darker.

PTCL Pensioners and the Long Struggle for Justice

The plight of PTCL pensioners provides, in my opinion, a painful example of the weaknesses of our judicial system.

For more than nine and a half years, PTCL pensioners remained trapped in endless litigation despite obtaining judgments in their favour from both the High Courts and the Supreme Court. Even after favourable judgments, implementation in the true spirit of those decisions remained delayed and incomplete.

There are so many PTCL-related cases throughout Pakistan that PTCL Headquarters reportedly established a separate legal unit under an Executive Vice President (Legal) solely to manage litigation relating to PTCL employees and pensioners.

The central dispute concerned pension increases announced by the Government of Pakistan for pensioners who had originally served in the T&T Department and were later transferred to Pakistan Telecommunication Corporation and subsequently to PTCL.

Historically, PTCL pensioners used to receive pensions through post offices like other government pensioners. Whenever the Government announced pension increases, those increases were automatically applied to PTCL pensioners as well.

However, in 2010, PTET reportedly directed the Director General Post Offices not to apply the Government-announced 20% pension increase to PTCL pensioners without approval from the PTET Board of Trustees. Subsequently, PTET announced only an 8% increase.

This led former Director General Development Mr. Arif and approximately thirty PTCL pensioners to file a writ petition before the Islamabad High Court in January 2011.

On 21 December 2011, Chief Justice Iqbal Hameedur Rahman decided the case in favour of the PTCL pensioners and directed payment of Government-announced pension increases along with arrears.

PTET and PTCL subsequently pursued prolonged litigation, including appeals before the Supreme Court.

Ultimately, on 12 June 2015, a three-member bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk, with Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Gulzar Ahmed as members, dismissed PTET/PTCL appeals and ruled that employees transferred from T&T to the Corporation and later to PTCL remained entitled to Government-announced pension increases.

The judgment was authored by Justice Gulzar Ahmed and unanimously supported by the other member Judges.Which is now reported in 2015 SCMR 1472

PTET and PTCL later filed review petitions, which were dismissed on 17 May 2017.

Despite these judgments, implementation disputes continued for years. Additional litigation arose regarding pensioners who had retired under the 2008 Voluntary Separation Scheme (VSS).

Several later proceedings and interim orders created confusion regarding the entitlement of VSS retirees, despite the original Supreme Court judgments not explicitly excluding them from Government-announced pension increases.

Subsequent contempt proceedings and litigation under Section 12(2) CPC prolonged the matter even further.

Delay in Justice and Human Consequences

The most tragic aspect of these prolonged proceedings is the human suffering involved. During these years of litigation, thousands of PTCL pensioners and widows reportedly passed away while waiting for justice and implementation of court orders.

In many neighbouring countries, courts give priority to cases involving pensioners and widows due to their financial vulnerability and advanced age. Courts often strictly penalise institutions that delay pension payments or create unnecessary obstacles.But unfortunately , in Pakistan, pensioners and widows frequently continue waiting for years despite favourable judicial orders.

Final Reflections

Society expects judges to decide cases solely according to law, evidence, and justice because judicial decisions directly affect people’s lives, dignity, and survival.

Yet judges are human beings, and personal preferences, external pressures, and institutional realities may influence decision-making. This is precisely why judicial independence, accountability, and moral courage are so essential.

In my opinion, the treatment of PTCL pensioners reflects many of the structural weaknesses within our judicial system. Even after obtaining clear judgments from the Supreme Court, implementation remained uncertain and incomplete for years.

The current condition of our judiciary is deeply troubling. Many people increasingly feel that decisions are influenced by pressure rather than justice. This perception is extremely dangerous for any democratic society.

Once again, I am reminded of the famous saying attributed to Winston Churchill:

“Countries are not destroyed by wars alone; they are destroyed when their courts fail to deliver justice.”

May Allah protect Pakistan and guide all institutions toward justice, fairness, and constitutional integrity.

Wassalam

Muhammad Tariq Azhar

Tuesday, 14 January 2020

Ottawa, Canada