The recent transfer of three judges to the Islamabad High Court has stirred unnecessary debate, despite being entirely constitutional, legal, and in the best interest of both the judiciary and the federation. Some critics have framed this move as an attack on judicial independence, but a closer look at the Constitution and historical precedent shows otherwise. This isn’t an arbitrary decision or an overreach of authority- it’s a well-thought-out step taken in full compliance with constitutional provisions, with the involvement of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, the Chief Justices of the relevant High Courts, and the consent of the judges being transferred.

Under Article 200 of the Constitution of Pakistan, the President has clear authority to transfer judges between High Courts when necessary. This provision ensures that judicial resources are effectively allocated where they are most needed, maintaining a balanced and efficient judicial system. The fact that multiple Chief Justices were involved in this decision only reinforces its legitimacy. This was not a unilateral action, nor was it politically motivated- it was a necessary step guided by constitutional principles and legal precedent.

Critics who argue against this transfer overlook that it follows established legal procedures rooted in past judicial practice. Judicial transfers are not new........

© Eurasia Review