Former Prime Minister and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan has filed an intra-court appeal in the Supreme Court challenging a constitutional bench’s verdict upholding the transfer of three high court judges to the Islamabad High Court (IHC).
According to the petition—filed through senior lawyer Idris Ashraf—Imran Khan argues that the June 19 verdict, passed with a 3-2 majority, undermines judicial independence and bypasses the constitutionally prescribed procedure for judicial appointments.
The appeal contends that granting the President discretionary power to determine seniority within the judiciary opens the door to executive interference in judicial matters, violating the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.
This is the eighth such appeal filed in the Supreme Court. Previous appellants include five IHC judges—Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Justice Babar Sattar, Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz—as well as the Lahore and Karachi Bar Associations, and PTI leaders including Shoaib Shaheen.
Imran Khan’s petition maintains that Article 200 does not authorize the President to initiate or finalize judicial transfers, and that such powers lie strictly with the executive, advised by the Prime Minister or cabinet. The judgment’s reference to presidential discretion implies an independent presidential authority, which the petition calls constitutionally flawed.
The petition also raises the issue of judicial seniority, asserting it is an internal matter of the judiciary, not an executive domain. Imran Khan argues that the financial and administrative disparities applied to permanently transferred judges create inequality and discrimination, contrary to the Constitution’s guarantees of fairness.
The petition stresses that Article 175-A, which governs judicial appointments, is being undermined by using Article 200 to validate what are effectively new appointments via transfers. This, the plea asserts, creates a constitutional contradiction and amounts to judicial overreach.
Citing the Indian Constitution’s Article 217, which clearly delineates when a judicial office is vacated due to transfer, the petition argues that Pakistan’s Constitution provides no such clause, reinforcing the notion that transfers are temporary and the judge retains a link to their parent High Court.
In closing, Imran Khan warns that upholding the current interpretation risks diluting judicial autonomy, and calls on the Supreme Court to revisit its earlier decision in the interest of constitutional integrity.