 |
| Justice Athar Minallah of the Supreme Court. — Supreme Court website/File |
Pakistan’s 77-Year Judicial Journey: A Call for Constitutional Courage
Supreme Court Justice Athar Minallah says Pakistan’s 77-year
judicial history isn’t a source of pride and urges the legal system to champion
the Constitution, truth, and accountability.
Justice Athar Minallah of the Supreme Court. —
Supreme Court website/FileKARACHI: Supreme Court's Justice Athar Minallah on
Thursday said that Pakistan’s 77-year judicial history is not a source of
pride, urging the judiciary to uphold the Constitution and remain accountable
to the...
On September 4, at the Karachi Bar Association, Supreme
Court Justice Athar Minallah delivered a stirring reflection. He calmly, yet
firmly, declared that Pakistan’s 77-year judicial history “is not a source
of pride.” More than a critique, it was a call to conscience—an urgent plea
for the legal community and the nation to live up to higher ideals and embrace
accountability. The News International
Justice Minallah’s words carried weight not because of his
title but because of what he honored: individuals who, at great personal cost,
stood up for the Constitution. He recalled judges in Sindh who refused to take
oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO)—including figures like
Justice Bachal, Justice Vilani, Justice Constantine, and Justice Bakhsh—who
chose principle over position. The News International
Justices like them refused to compromise their solemn oath.
It’s a rare nod to courage in Pakistan’s judicial past, he observed—a history
in which most people struggle to name even five notable judges. The News International
He also honored the Lawyers’ Movement, spotlighting the 90
lawyers—including leaders like Munir A. Malik—who marched, protested, and bled
for the supremacy of law. Their sacrifices are, in his words, “a debt that
cannot be repaid.” The News International
Laced throughout his remarks was a deep frustration:
Pakistan has long lacked constitutional governance. He spoke plainly—if judges
fail to ensure constitutional rule, they break their oath. The judiciary must
serve both the public and a higher moral duty. The News InternationalDawn
Drawing a powerful contrast, Justice Minallah mentioned
Britain—a country that functions under an uncodified constitution for over a
century, yet practices the rule of law effectively. Meanwhile, Pakistan’s own
history—and even its textbooks—have been mangled or misrepresented. “A society that
abandons truth faces destruction,” he warned. The News InternationalDawn
His reflections picked at deeper wounds too. The father of
the nation’s democratic journey, Pakistan’s constituent assembly, was dissolved
by the military and civil bureaucracy just as a constitution was being drafted
for both East and West Pakistan. That act set the stage for the country’s later
division. People in East Pakistan didn’t want to separate; they were made to
feel like burdens. The News InternationalDawn
But what struck most was his unwavering insistence on
accountability. For him, the oath isn’t rhetoric—it’s a living commitment.
Judges must decide without fear and remain answerable both to the people and to
God. The News InternationalDawn
He didn’t shy away from uncomfortable truths. History has
been distorted, he said. The generation of leaders and judges before him had
failed in many ways—and they must admit it. A denial of truth only sharpens the
path to decay. Dawn
At its core, Justice Minallah’s message was part confession,
part challenge. He offered a sobering perspective that the power of democratic
institutions remains unrealized when the judiciary fails to enforce
constitutional norms. But he also turned a hopeful gaze to the future,
especially Pakistan’s youth.
He spoke of the young generation’s idealism as key to transforming
the country. Constitutional governance, equitable rule, freedom of
expression—he argued, these aren’t just lofty goals, they are urgently
necessary for a fair destiny. “If truth is suppressed, society perishes,” he
repeated. Dawn
By the time his remarks concluded, there was clarity. This
wasn’t an attack—it was an invitation. An invitation to judges, lawyers,
educators, and citizens to understand that pride cannot be rooted in past
titles or history books; it must emerge from courageous and faithful action in
the present.