ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) adopted service rules amid opposition from some judges. The full court meeting witnessed a tense situation as judges clashed over the adoption of the High Court Establishment (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2025. Despite strong resistance from some senior judges, the rules were approved by a slim majority, deepening divisions within the bench.
The meeting, attended by all 11 judges, including Chief Justice Sardar Mohammad Sarfraz Dogar, was convened to deliberate on three issues: amendments to the polygamy law, persistent flaws in the IHC building, and the adoption of new service rules. While consensus was reached on the first two items, the proposed rules sparked heated disagreement.
Amendments to Polygamy Law and Building Flaws
The full court unanimously approved an amendment transferring jurisdiction over polygamy cases from executive magistrates to family courts. This step was hailed as a necessary reform to strengthen family law jurisprudence.
On the issue of the IHC building, the judges agreed to refer the matter to the federal government for a detailed inquiry into structural defects. Previous investigations by the Public Works Department had identified faulty elevators, inadequate cooling systems, and insufficient parking, but failed to assign responsibility. Judges urged the government to ensure accountability and implement corrective measures.
Sharp Division Over Service Rules
Unlike the other matters, the introduction of the IHC Rules, 2025 sharply divided the bench. Chief Justice Dogar strongly backed their adoption, but senior judges—including Justices Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Babar Sattar, Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, and Saman Rafat Imtiaz—voiced serious objections.
Two judges, Justices Babar Sattar and Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, had circulated letters a day earlier warning that administrative powers were being misused to sideline dissenting judges. They objected to a new requirement for judges to seek No-Objection Certificates (NOCs) from the chief justice for foreign travel, and raised concerns about manipulation of case assignments.
The judges also criticised the last-minute distribution of the 600-page draft document, arguing that meaningful consultation was impossible. They demanded additional agenda items to address their objections, but the chief justice rejected their request.
Contentious Vote
Ultimately, Chief Justice Dogar called a vote. Six judges, including the chief justice, approved the new rules, while five opposed them, vowing to record written objections. Dissenting judges even questioned whether those voting in favour had read the voluminous document—an allegation met with silence.
The narrow passage of the High Court Establishment Rules has left the IHC bitterly divided. While the chief justice has strengthened his administrative authority, dissenting judges have signalled they will continue to challenge measures they believe compromise judicial independence.
