lashes between lawyers and police erupted recently at the Lahore High Court when lawyers, protesting against the transfer of a court and a terrorism case against their peers, attempted to enter the high court premises leading to police action involving a baton charge, tear gas and water cannons. The Punjab and Sindh Bar Councils responded by calling strikes and condemning the police action which they described as excessive and a violation of rights. The lawyers demanded the dismissal of the cases against them and the withdrawal of court division notifications, vowing to continue that agitation until their demands were met.

Such clashes between lawyers and law enforcement as well as prosecution of lawyers under Anti-Terrorism Act and contempt of court, have become more frequent. These conflicts highlight systemic issues in the legal system, such as resistance to administrative changes, concerns over judicial independence and the struggle for rights and good legal procedures. The incidents not only disrupt legal proceedings but also reflect on the tension between different arms of the state and the challenges in implementing reforms in the judiciary and the law enforcement.

The recent tension between the government and the lawyers pertains to the registration of terrorism cases against some lawyers. These cases stem from various confrontations involving altercations with law enforcement. One such instance occurred in Toba Tek Singh, where lawyers were charged under the Anti-Terrorism Act for manhandling an assistant commissioner and stealing records. This case has been widely criticised as an example of the misuse of terrorism laws. The lawyers say that these charges are disproportionate and are being used to intimidate lawyers who are merely exercising their right to protest and express dissent against certain judicial policies. The Pakistan Bar Council and various bar associations have condemned these actions and called for nationwide strikes in solidarity with the affected lawyers.

These events highlight ongoing tensions between the state’s use of legal mechanisms and lawyers’ demand for fair treatment under the law. The situation underscores the broader challenge facing the rule of law in Pakistan, where the application of terrorism charges in political contexts is a contentious issue.

Another concern has been the alleged interference of intelligence agencies in judicial matters. Several judges from the Islamabad High Court have reported instances of intimidation, coercion and surveillance, purportedly to influence judicial outcomes in political cases. This has allegedly included threats to judges and their families and unauthorised surveillance in personal spaces. An example of this was the reaction to the surrounding of the Islamabad High Court by security forces. The event led to widespread condemnation and protests by the legal community, emphasising their demand for an independent judiciary free from external pressures. Sine then several petitions hae been filed in the Supreme Court seeking orders to stop intelligence agencies from interfering in the working of the Judiciary. These petitions have called for strict adherence to the constitutional mandate of judicial independence.

The situation underscores the broader challenge facing the rule of law in Pakistan, where the application of terrorism charges in political contexts is a contentious issue.

Another issues has been the proposed changes to the judicial system. In response to the proposed changes, lawyers across various regions in Pakistan have organised strikes. Through their bar councils and associations, lawyers have issued statements and passed resolutions denouncing acts that undermine judicial independence. These statements often call upon the government and relevant authorities to respect the autonomy of the Judiciary and to refrain from actions that could be perceived as coercive or intrusive. These actions reflect the legal community’s commitment to safeguarding the integrity and independence of the Judiciary. They play a crucial role in highlighting issues and mobilising public and institutional support for judicial independence.

There have been calls from within the Judiciary for legislative action to regulate intelligence agencies and protect judicial independence. Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa has been particularly vocal, advocating for judicial interventions to curb such intrusions. This situation is seen as a pivotal moment for the judiciary.

The Judiciary has faced challenges from the Executive branch in the past. Its independence has been compromised in some instances and it has either failed to act against unconstitutional actions or has been complicit in endorsing those.

The constitution mandates the separation of the Judiciary from the Executive to ensure impartiality and fairness in the administration of justice. However, the execution of these constitutional provisions has been fraught with challenges, including the influence of the Executive in judicial appointments and decisions.

These issues highlight a critical juncture for Pakistan’s judiciary. It must navigate the pressures from non-judicial organs of the state and maintain its autonomy and integrity. The resolution of these challenges is essential not only for the Judiciary but also for the overall health of Pakistan’s democratic institutions. The legal community has a crucial role in advocating for judicial independence. It has often acted as a counterbalance to pressures from other sectors of government and society. Their actions are fundamental to ongoing efforts to ensure that the judiciary remains a fair and impartial arbiter. This includes protecting our own from persecution and unfair prosecution.

The writer is writer is an advocate of the high court, a founding partner at LexMercatoria and a visiting teacher at Bahria University’s Law Department. She can be reached at minahil.ali12@yahoo.com