SJC refuses to name judges cleared of complaints

By /
complaints

Supreme Judicial Council Approves Service Rules 2025, Rejects Public Disclosure of Judges’ Names

By Arfa Feroz Zake
July 12, 2025 | Islamabad

In a significant development in Pakistan’s judicial framework, the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) convened a high-level meeting on Saturday, July 12, 2025, at the Supreme Court in Islamabad. The meeting was chaired by the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Yahya Afridi. It focused on reviewing complaints against judges, discussing reforms, and approving the much-anticipated Supreme Judicial Council Secretariat Service Rules, 2025.

The meeting, which lasted for more than two hours, brought together top judicial figures including Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Aalia Neelum, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah (via video link), and Chief Justices of the Lahore and Sindh High Courts, including Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar.

19 Complaints Dismissed Under Article 209

According to the official press release issued after the meeting, the Council examined a total of 24 complaints filed under Article 209 of the Constitution, which relates to the accountability and conduct of judges in superior courts. Out of these:

  • 19 complaints were unanimously dismissed, indicating that the Council did not find sufficient evidence or merit to proceed with inquiries.

  • 5 complaints were deferred for further consideration and legal examination.

The decision showcases the Council’s commitment to due process and maintaining the integrity of the judiciary. The SJC reiterated that it will continue to uphold constitutional procedures while dealing with judicial accountability matters.

No Disclosure of Judges’ Names in Resolved Complaints

One of the most debated topics during the session was a proposal to disclose the names of judges involved in complaints that were resolved or dismissed.

However, the Council unanimously rejected this proposal.

“The Council decided to maintain its long-standing practice of non-disclosure of judges’ names in such cases to protect their reputations from unwarranted public scrutiny,” said a source close to the proceedings.

The SJC emphasized that disclosing names of judges in resolved or baseless complaints could harm their public image and hinder the independence of the judiciary. The decision reflects a delicate balance between transparency and judicial dignity.

Approval of Supreme Judicial Council Secretariat Service Rules, 2025

In a major administrative move, the Council approved the draft of the Supreme Judicial Council Secretariat Service Rules, 2025.

These rules are designed to regulate and streamline the working of the Secretariat of the SJC. The rules cover aspects such as:

  • Recruitment procedures

  • Job responsibilities

  • Performance monitoring

  • Administrative conduct

  • Disciplinary procedures for Secretariat staff

The move is part of broader efforts to modernize judicial administration and enhance internal governance mechanisms within the Council.

Legal experts see the adoption of these rules as a vital step toward institutional development.

“Formalizing service rules for the SJC Secretariat is long overdue and essential for efficiency and transparency,” said a senior constitutional lawyer.

Legal and Drafting Review of Code of Conduct Amendments

During the meeting, the Council also took up the proposed amendments to the Code of Conduct for Judges. However, no final decision was made on this matter.

The SJC observed that the existing procedure for judicial inquiries and the proposed amendments to the Code of Conduct required a thorough legal and drafting review.

As per the official statement:

“The Council resolved that both the inquiry procedure and Code of Conduct amendments need to be re-examined from legal and drafting points of view before being finalized.”

This suggests that upcoming sessions may include consultations with legal experts, retired judges, and constitutional scholars to ensure that the changes align with both constitutional principles and international best practices.

Participants of the Meeting

The presence of the country’s most senior judges reflected the gravity of the matters under discussion. According to the statement, the following judges and officials were in attendance:

  • Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi (Chairing the meeting)

  • Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah (joined via video link)

  • Justice Munib Akhtar

  • Justice Aalia Neelum

  • Chief Justice of Lahore High Court

  • Chief Justice of Sindh High Court, Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar

This composition underscores the high-level judicial consensus required for any decisions taken during the SJC meetings.

Article 209: Accountability of Judges

Article 209 of the Constitution of Pakistan empowers the Supreme Judicial Council to initiate inquiries against judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts for misconduct, incapacity, or other grounds.

Once a complaint is filed, the SJC examines the evidence, hears the judge concerned if needed, and decides whether further action is warranted. If misconduct is proven, the Council can recommend the judge’s removal to the President of Pakistan.

The SJC plays a critical role in ensuring that judicial officers uphold the highest ethical standards and maintain public trust in the judiciary.

Past Controversies and Need for Reform

The role of the Supreme Judicial Council has often been in the spotlight due to high-profile cases involving judges and alleged misuse of judicial authority.

Critics have argued that the SJC’s internal procedures lack transparency and fail to deliver swift outcomes. There have also been calls from civil society and legal experts for:

  • Time-bound investigations

  • Clear publication of inquiry procedures

  • Accountability of SJC members themselves

  • Publication of performance audits

However, the Council has historically maintained that confidentiality is necessary to protect judges from public pressure and media trials, especially in cases where complaints are found to be politically motivated or baseless.

A Step Towards Modernization

The approval of the SJC Secretariat Service Rules, 2025, indicates a clear intention to modernize the judicial accountability process.

In recent years, there has been growing demand for greater transparency and efficiency in how judicial complaints are handled. Pakistan’s judiciary is under increasing pressure to reform amid concerns over delays in justice, corruption, and misuse of power.

Experts say that the new rules are a step in the right direction.

“By establishing formal service rules, the SJC is setting the tone for a more structured and rule-based approach to judicial governance,” said Advocate Imran Mehmood, a constitutional analyst.

Political Reactions and Public Opinion

As expected, the decision to withhold names of judges in resolved complaints has drawn mixed reactions.

Some politicians and civil society activists believe the SJC missed an opportunity to strengthen public confidence by being more open.

“Judicial accountability cannot happen in secrecy. If judges are cleared, let their names be known to restore their honor,” tweeted a member of the National Assembly.

Others, however, sided with the Council, arguing that unsubstantiated allegations could permanently damage careers and reputations if names were disclosed publicly.

“The judiciary must protect its own from frivolous complaints. This is a fair and balanced decision,” said senior lawyer Khawaja Rauf.

Future Outlook

As the Council moves ahead with legal reviews of the Code of Conduct and other administrative reforms, the judicial system in Pakistan appears to be entering a period of self-reflection and policy restructuring.

There is also growing speculation that the Council might soon invite public input or expert opinions on how to improve judicial oversight, especially in light of global trends toward open justice.

For now, however, the Council’s decisions from July 12 indicate that it is pursuing cautious reforms with a focus on preserving judicial independence while slowly adapting to calls for modernization.

______________________________________________________________________

PM Shehbaz reaffirms govt’s resolve to achieve economic prosperity through ‘bold reforms’

 

Read This Article

Conclusion

The Supreme Judicial Council’s meeting on July 12, 2025, marked a pivotal moment in Pakistan’s judicial evolution. With the dismissal of 19 complaints under Article 209, the approval of the SJC Secretariat Service Rules 2025, and the decision to uphold confidentiality regarding judges’ names, the Council has once again signaled its adherence to constitutional principles.

As reforms continue to unfold, the focus will remain on balancing judicial accountability with institutional integrity — a challenge the SJC seems committed to navigating with legal prudence and administrative foresight.

Supreme Judicial Council Approves Service Rules 2025, Rejects Public Disclosure of Judges’ Names

By Arfa Feroz Zake
July 12, 2025 | Islamabad

In a significant development in Pakistan’s judicial framework, the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) convened a high-level meeting on Saturday, July 12, 2025, at the Supreme Court in Islamabad. The meeting was chaired by the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Yahya Afridi. It focused on reviewing complaints against judges, discussing reforms, and approving the much-anticipated Supreme Judicial Council Secretariat Service Rules, 2025.

The meeting, which lasted for more than two hours, brought together top judicial figures including Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Aalia Neelum, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah (via video link), and Chief Justices of the Lahore and Sindh High Courts, including Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar.

19 Complaints Dismissed Under Article 209

According to the official press release issued after the meeting, the Council examined a total of 24 complaints filed under Article 209 of the Constitution, which relates to the accountability and conduct of judges in superior courts. Out of these:

  • 19 complaints were unanimously dismissed, indicating that the Council did not find sufficient evidence or merit to proceed with inquiries.

  • 5 complaints were deferred for further consideration and legal examination.

The decision showcases the Council’s commitment to due process and maintaining the integrity of the judiciary. The SJC reiterated that it will continue to uphold constitutional procedures while dealing with judicial accountability matters.

No Disclosure of Judges’ Names in Resolved Complaints

One of the most debated topics during the session was a proposal to disclose the names of judges involved in complaints that were resolved or dismissed.

However, the Council unanimously rejected this proposal.

“The Council decided to maintain its long-standing practice of non-disclosure of judges’ names in such cases to protect their reputations from unwarranted public scrutiny,” said a source close to the proceedings.

The SJC emphasized that disclosing names of judges in resolved or baseless complaints could harm their public image and hinder the independence of the judiciary. The decision reflects a delicate balance between transparency and judicial dignity.

Approval of Supreme Judicial Council Secretariat Service Rules, 2025

In a major administrative move, the Council approved the draft of the Supreme Judicial Council Secretariat Service Rules, 2025.

These rules are designed to regulate and streamline the working of the Secretariat of the SJC. The rules cover aspects such as:

  • Recruitment procedures

  • Job responsibilities

  • Performance monitoring

  • Administrative conduct

  • Disciplinary procedures for Secretariat staff

The move is part of broader efforts to modernize judicial administration and enhance internal governance mechanisms within the Council.

Legal experts see the adoption of these rules as a vital step toward institutional development.

“Formalizing service rules for the SJC Secretariat is long overdue and essential for efficiency and transparency,” said a senior constitutional lawyer.

Legal and Drafting Review of Code of Conduct Amendments

During the meeting, the Council also took up the proposed amendments to the Code of Conduct for Judges. However, no final decision was made on this matter.

The SJC observed that the existing procedure for judicial inquiries and the proposed amendments to the Code of Conduct required a thorough legal and drafting review.

As per the official statement:

“The Council resolved that both the inquiry procedure and Code of Conduct amendments need to be re-examined from legal and drafting points of view before being finalized.”

This suggests that upcoming sessions may include consultations with legal experts, retired judges, and constitutional scholars to ensure that the changes align with both constitutional principles and international best practices.

Participants of the Meeting

The presence of the country’s most senior judges reflected the gravity of the matters under discussion. According to the statement, the following judges and officials were in attendance:

  • Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi (Chairing the meeting)

  • Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah (joined via video link)

  • Justice Munib Akhtar

  • Justice Aalia Neelum

  • Chief Justice of Lahore High Court

  • Chief Justice of Sindh High Court, Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar

This composition underscores the high-level judicial consensus required for any decisions taken during the SJC meetings.

Article 209: Accountability of Judges

Article 209 of the Constitution of Pakistan empowers the Supreme Judicial Council to initiate inquiries against judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts for misconduct, incapacity, or other grounds.

Once a complaint is filed, the SJC examines the evidence, hears the judge concerned if needed, and decides whether further action is warranted. If misconduct is proven, the Council can recommend the judge’s removal to the President of Pakistan.

The SJC plays a critical role in ensuring that judicial officers uphold the highest ethical standards and maintain public trust in the judiciary.

Past Controversies and Need for Reform

The role of the Supreme Judicial Council has often been in the spotlight due to high-profile cases involving judges and alleged misuse of judicial authority.

Critics have argued that the SJC’s internal procedures lack transparency and fail to deliver swift outcomes. There have also been calls from civil society and legal experts for:

  • Time-bound investigations

  • Clear publication of inquiry procedures

  • Accountability of SJC members themselves

  • Publication of performance audits

However, the Council has historically maintained that confidentiality is necessary to protect judges from public pressure and media trials, especially in cases where complaints are found to be politically motivated or baseless.

A Step Towards Modernization

The approval of the SJC Secretariat Service Rules, 2025, indicates a clear intention to modernize the judicial accountability process.

In recent years, there has been growing demand for greater transparency and efficiency in how judicial complaints are handled. Pakistan’s judiciary is under increasing pressure to reform amid concerns over delays in justice, corruption, and misuse of power.

Experts say that the new rules are a step in the right direction.

“By establishing formal service rules, the SJC is setting the tone for a more structured and rule-based approach to judicial governance,” said Advocate Imran Mehmood, a constitutional analyst.

Political Reactions and Public Opinion

As expected, the decision to withhold names of judges in resolved complaints has drawn mixed reactions.

Some politicians and civil society activists believe the SJC missed an opportunity to strengthen public confidence by being more open.

“Judicial accountability cannot happen in secrecy. If judges are cleared, let their names be known to restore their honor,” tweeted a member of the National Assembly.

Others, however, sided with the Council, arguing that unsubstantiated allegations could permanently damage careers and reputations if names were disclosed publicly.

“The judiciary must protect its own from frivolous complaints. This is a fair and balanced decision,” said senior lawyer Khawaja Rauf.

Future Outlook

As the Council moves ahead with legal reviews of the Code of Conduct and other administrative reforms, the judicial system in Pakistan appears to be entering a period of self-reflection and policy restructuring.

There is also growing speculation that the Council might soon invite public input or expert opinions on how to improve judicial oversight, especially in light of global trends toward open justice.

For now, however, the Council’s decisions from July 12 indicate that it is pursuing cautious reforms with a focus on preserving judicial independence while slowly adapting to calls for modernization.

Conclusion

The Supreme Judicial Council’s meeting on July 12, 2025, marked a pivotal moment in Pakistan’s judicial evolution. With the dismissal of 19 complaints under Article 209, the approval of the SJC Secretariat Service Rules 2025, and the decision to uphold confidentiality regarding judges’ names, the Council has once again signaled its adherence to constitutional principles.

As reforms continue to unfold, the focus will remain on balancing judicial accountability with institutional integrity — a challenge the SJC seems committed to navigating with legal prudence and administrative foresight.

Must Read

Scroll to Top