Pakistan court rules judge lacked authority in high-profile Aafia Siddiqui hearing

The Islamabad High Court has declared void an order issued last year by one of its judges in the high-profile case of Aafia Siddiqui, ruling that the proceedings lacked jurisdiction because the judge was not part of the official roster approved by the chief justice.

In a detailed judgment issued Monday, the larger bench led by Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas held that judicial benches derive their authority strictly from the roster issued by the chief justice under Articles 175(2) and 202 of Pakistan’s Constitution and the High Court Rules. The court said any departure from this framework would undermine institutional order and risk judicial anarchy.

The controversy arose on July 21, 2025, when Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan convened the court despite being on pre-announced leave and absent from the weekly roster.

The case stems from a long-running petition filed by Dr. Fowzia Siddiqui seeking government support to secure the release or repatriation of her sister, who is serving an 86-year sentence in the United States for attempting to kill American personnel in Afghanistan in 2008.

At the time, Justice Khan issued a strongly worded order accusing the executive branch of manipulating the roster system, which is administered by the chief justice, to obstruct proceedings.

He noted that an application to amend the roster had been submitted but remained unsigned, stating that the chief justice “did not find even 30 seconds to sign it.”

Citing the need for swift justice, Justice Khan proceeded to hear the matter and initiated contempt proceedings against Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and the federal cabinet for failing to explain why they had not supported an amicus brief in related U.S. litigation.

The judge also criticized what he described as executive interference following the 26th Constitutional Amendment, enacted in October 2024, which expanded the role of parliament and the executive in judicial appointments and the formation of constitutional benches.

Larger bench ruling

The larger bench rejected this reasoning, ruling that a judge cannot self-assign cases or sit outside the approved roster, even in matters considered urgent. It declared the July 21 order issued without lawful jurisdiction and void from the outset.

The decision comes amid ongoing debate over judicial independence in Pakistan. Petitions challenging the 26th Constitutional Amendment remain pending before the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

Three members of the larger bench were appointed after the amendment’s passage. A fourth judge on the bench had previously been among Islamabad High Court judges who wrote to then Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa in 2024, alleging interference by intelligence agencies in judicial affairs.

The federal government has not yet commented on the ruling. The underlying petition in Aafia Siddiqui’s case continues before the Islamabad High Court.