Judges at the crossroads

The judiciary in the Subcontinent since Independence has carried the burden of great expectations. It was meant to be the final arbiter between state and citizen, the guardian of liberty, the shield against arbitrary power. Yet, more often than not, it has wavered under political pressure. At critical moments in history, judges have chosen the path of compromise rather than resistance. The record is uneven, but not without flashes of brilliance that continue to inspire faith in the institution.

In Pakistan, this paradox is sharply visible. Courts have legitimised martial law on more than one occasion. Yet the same judiciary has also produced judges who refused to bend, paying the price in isolation or forced retirement. The words of Justice AR Cornelius remain etched in memory: "The law is not an instrument of the government; it is a restraint upon all of us, the government included." His voice was that of a jurist who understood that the majesty of law lies precisely in its ability to limit the powerful, not to serve them.

The current convulsions within the Islamabad High Court (IHC) echo that historic struggle. Just days before a full court meeting, Justice Babar Sattar presented a detailed charge sheet against the IHC Chief Justice. He catalogued what he described as the "judicial ills" that have taken root in the IHC: compromises of principle, questionable case allocations, and a drift away from the ideals of impartial adjudication. This move was not merely administrative; it was a frontal challenge to the culture of silence and conformity that often pervades superior courts.

Justice Sattar's gesture recalls those few who, in earlier times, refused to lend legitimacy to constitutional deviations. In doing so, he has brought into sharp relief the battle for the judiciary's soul. History rarely remembers the conformists; it remembers those who resisted when resistance was most costly.

Across the border, India's experience has been similar in pattern if not always in detail. The Indian Supreme Court's deference to authority during Indira Gandhi's Emergency remains one of its darkest chapters. Decades later, the court is again retreating from its role as the sentinel of fundamental rights, particularly on questions of executive overreach.

South Asia's two largest judiciaries thus stand at crossroads, their credibility frayed by accusations of timidity and selective courage.

An independent judiciary is not simply another institution within the state; it is the bedrock of democratic order. When it falters, the entire structure of rights and liberties begins to crumble. Conversely, when even a single judge refuses to capitulate, it rekindles public faith in the possibility of justice. Pakistan's judicial history bears witness to this dual reality. From the validation of coups under the "doctrine of necessity" to the stirring defiance of judges during the lawyers' movement of 2007, the pendulum has swung between shame and pride.

Today, the charge sheet laid down by Justice Sattar has again stirred the waters. It is a reminder that the crisis of the judiciary is not abstract; it is immediate, unfolding in real time, and demanding a reckoning. By daring to speak, he has set a standard for colleagues who may otherwise have chosen silence. Whether this sparks reform or further repression remains to be seen. But it ensures that the record of these days will not be written solely by those in power.

The lesson of history is clear. Institutions are redeemed not by structures or statutes alone, but by individuals who stand by their oath. The dignity of the courts rests on judges who remember that their ultimate allegiance is to the Constitution and the people, not to transient holders of office.

As Pakistan steers through its present turbulence, and India grapples with its own judicial anxieties, both nations would do well to heed the timeless warning: where courts become pliant, tyranny thrives. But where even a handful of judges hold the line, the possibility of justice endures.

Faiz gave voice to this defiance in immortal words:

Mataa-e-loh o qalam chhin gayi to kya gham hai

Ke khoon-e-dil mein dooboo li hain ungliyaan mein ne

Zubaan pe mohar lagi hai to kya, ke rakh di hai

Har aik halqa-e-zanjeer mein zubaan mein ne