ustice Qazi Faez Isa has retired and Justice Yahya Afridi has assumed the office of the chief justice of Pakistan after the parliament legislated the 26th Amendment to the constitution, making some far-reaching judicial reforms, including the provision for the formation of a special bench in the Supreme Court of Pakistan to adjudicate the constitutional cases.

Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf, the main opposition party, has indicated that it intends to launch a movement against the amendment. Several legal experts, have warned, meanwhile, that the law suffers from lacunae and that more legislation will be needed to fix it.

Justice Isa is likely to be remembered by those who have followed the evolution of Pakistan’s judicial system as a fairly unbiased judge. Those committed to various agendas or ideologies will, however, continue to call him as a controversial figure.

This scribe has learnt it from usually reliable sources that the government had offered him an extension and reappointment but he rejected all such offers. He had the undesirable distinction of being the first judge in Pakistan who was already in the crosshairs of the ruling party as well as the powerful establishment before he was appointed chief justice. He was the only judge who faced a trial following a presidential reference for his removal to the Supreme Judicial Council. He fought his case with remarkable courage and was firm. He is the only chief justice of Pakistan so far to have supported a reduction in the chief justice’s powers to take suo motu action and form the benches. He did not target his critics. Dignified conduct is a part of his substantial legacy in the SC.

Given the little time available, the government moved swiftly and sagaciously. The parliamentary committee dominated by its representatives chose not to appoint the most senior judge, Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, a well-respected jurist in his own right. Justice Shah had long been in the good books of the ruling coalition. However, his verdict in the reserved seats case led to some controversy and may have disappointed many. Some analysts had predicted that if Justice Shah was passed over for appointment, the lawyers would launch a protest movement and that the PTI could exploit it for its benefit.

The 12-member parliamentary committee, constituted under the amended constitution, had received three names from the Ministry of Law and Justice. The PTI and members of the committee had abstained from the consultation.

The appointment of Justice Afridi proved a major setback for the PTI and its plans to launch a movement with the help of the lawyers’ community. Most of the lawyers’ associations have welcomed the appointment.

The CJP’s appointment has proved a major setback for the PTI and its plans to launch a movement with the help of the lawyers’ community. Most of the lawyers’ associations have welcomed the appointment and congratulated Justice Afridi. These gestures by the Bar Councils and various bar associations have dampened the PTI’s spirits. Justice Afridi enjoys a good reputation as a constitutionalist and an independent judge. In the past, he has written dissenting notes as part of several benches led by Justices Isa, Bandial and Gulzar.

Lawyer Hamid Khan, a former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association and a PTI leader, has said in a TV show: “The government has curtailed the independence of the Judiciary by promulgating the 26th Amendment. The lawyers will safeguard the Judiciary and the constitution through a powerful movement.”

Advocate Yasin Azad, another former president of the SCBA, has said: “This has nothing to do with the judiciary’s independence. It is about personal choices. In the past, the chief justices used to appoint judges to the Supreme Court mostly in their discretion. I was a part of the Supreme Judicial Council and observed that the CJP appointed all the judges on his own. Two names proposed by the Pakistan Bar Council were bluntly ignored.” Advocate Azad says he believes that the amended law curtailing the chief justice’s sole discretion is an improvement.

About the operation of the amended law, he says: “Several issues will arise after the implementation of the amendment. The government will need to further amend the constitution and the laws because a constitutional bench is an altogether new concept in Pakistan.”

On the political front, Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur has vowed to launch a movement against the amendment. Talking to the media, he said: “We will launch a countrywide movement. I will lead it personally. We will send the [non-PTI] rulers home.”

A lack of effective coordination, misunderstandings within the PTI and Imran Khan’s strong-headedness have once again been exposed in the process. The ruling parties did well to hold consultative meetings with all parliamentary stakeholders, including the PTI which was represented by Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Omar Ayub Khan, PTI chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan and Barrister Ali Zafar. After the final meeting, Barrister Khan had told the media: “We have agreed upon 98 percent of the clauses. He special committee has tailored those according to our recommendations. I will meet the PTI founder in jail and will discuss the amendment with him. We will, if he gives us the go-ahead, vote for the amendments. If he stops us, then will not vote for it.”

The PTI agreed with the amendments in principle. However, it did not vote for it in the Senate and the National Assembly. It could thus be accused of being in the parliament for their political goals and not for legislation. The episode also highlighted the current PTI leaders’ absolute subordination to the founder’s wishes and their inability to act according to their individual or collective wisdom.

The procedure for the formation of the constitutional bench has yet to start. It might trigger some complications that will delay the hearing of the cases and a reason to the lawyers’ groups to protest against the legislation.

The writer is a senior journalist, teacher of journalism, writer and analyst. He tweets at @BukhariMubasher