is also facing unprecedented challenges to its independence. The response to these allegations will determine not only the credibility of the legal system but also the future of democracy and rule of law in the country. The letter signed by six Islamabad High Court judges, detailing instances of pressure, intimidation, and surveillance, underscores a grave threat to the judiciary’s autonomy. These accounts, including reports of abduction, torture of relatives, and covert surveillance, paint a distressing picture of a system under duress. In response to these revelations, the legal community has come together, with over 300 lawyers urging the Supreme Court to intervene under Article 184(3) of the Constitution. This provision grants the Supreme Court the authority to address matters of public importance concerning fundamental rights. The lawyers rightly argue that any investigation commissioned by the government risks lacking independence and effectiveness, given the gravity of the allegations.

The formation of an inquiry commission, while a step in the right direction, must ensure transparency, impartiality, and meaningful accountability. The choice of former Chief Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani to lead the investigation brings credibility, but the commission’s mandate and oversight mechanisms must be robust to address the concerns raised by the legal community. The judiciary, as the guardian of constitutional rights, must remain free from external pressures or influences. The principle of judicial independence is not merely a legal doctrine but a cornerstone of democracy. When judges are coerced or intimidated, the very fabric of justice is torn apart, eroding public trust and confidence. The call for a judicial convention to discuss the challenges faced by judges in maintaining their independence is a necessary step towards solidarity and collective action. It is imperative to establish clear guidelines and mechanisms to address instances of interference promptly and effectively. The Supreme Court, in collaboration with high courts, must lead efforts to safeguard the judiciary from undue influence. The proceedings related to these allegations must be conducted transparently and openly. Televising the hearings will ensure public scrutiny and demonstrate the judiciary’s commitment to accountability. The judiciary must uphold its duty to dispense justice without fear or favor, reaffirming its role as a pillar of democracy.

The recent events present a critical juncture for Pakistan’s legal system. The response to these challenges will shape the future trajectory of democracy and rule of law in the country. It is incumbent upon all stakeholders, from the judiciary to civil society, to stand united in defense of judicial independence and the principles of justice. Only through collective action and unwavering commitment can Pakistan overcome this crisis and reaffirm its commitment to democracy and constitutionalism. The call for the Supreme Court to take cognizance under Article 184(3) is a crucial step. A transparent, public hearing with a full bench of judges would demonstrate a commitment to justice. Limiting the scope of the inquiry only weakens its credibility. The statement also highlights the need for long-term solutions. The SJC should establish clear guidelines for handling intimidation attempts. Collaboration between the Supreme Court and high courts to create institutional mechanisms for reporting and addressing interference is vital. These are not merely bureaucratic steps; they are the building blocks of a robust judicial system. Justice delayed is justice denied, and justice compromised is a pillar of democracy weakened. Pakistan’s legal fraternity and its citizens deserve a judiciary free from undue influence, one that upholds the law with fairness and impartiality. The time for decisive action is now.

***