By Agha Iqrar Haroon
Supreme Court Justice Athar Minallah is once again at the center of controversy after he claimed in Karachi that Pakistan’s 77-year judicial history is not a source of pride for him. He stressed the need for the supremacy of the Constitution, discredited the parliamentary system, and demanded accountability from all institutions.
Raised in a politically active family, he is the son of the late Bilquis Nasrum Minallah, who served as a member of the National Assembly from 1985 to 1988 on a reserved seat nominated by military dictator Gen. Zia-ul-Haq, and Nasrum Minallah, who served as Chief Secretary of Balochistan. Justice Minallah has long been associated with political and military circles. In 2002, he took charge as the Minister of Law, Parliamentary Affairs, Human Rights, Local Government, and Rural Development in the then-NWFP provincial government under Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s martial law. He was considered a vocal supporter of Musharraf until 2007, when Musharraf clashed with Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. During the lawyers’ movement, Minallah joined protests against the very regime he once served, despite earlier defending Musharraf’s martial law as Chief Executive of the country. After Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s restoration, Minallah became a vocal critic of the judiciary until he was inducted as a judge of the Islamabad High Court in June 2014.
While addressing a seminar at the Karachi Bar Association, Justice Minallah praised judges who refused to take oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO), seemingly overlooking the fact that he himself had joined a government formed under the same PCO.
Critics argue that a person whose family benefited from two martial laws in Pakistan appears hypocritical when lauding those who refused to legitimize the PCO. They also point out that if he finds the system so flawed, he should not have joined it in the first place—either as a provincial minister or later as a judge of the Islamabad High Court. Even now, they argue, he has the option to resign from what he claims is a system not following the Constitution.
At a time when Pakistan is emerging diplomatically on the global stage, with regional and global powers prioritizing investment and stronger relations, experts credit this progress to cooperation between the government and military leadership. Against this backdrop, critics believe that Justice Minallah’s negative remarks about the system appear politically loaded. Scholars argue that Pakistan is not experimenting with a so-called “hybrid system” but rather an “all-inclusive” governance model, similar to structures in parts of Eastern Europe. In an article titled “Time to Throw Rotten Eggs Out of the Basket”, it was highlighted that for the past three years, the state has been providing academicians, practitioners, and writers with essential inputs for narrative-building—something missing in earlier decades.
This emerging governance model is described as a “multi-domain all-inclusive” system, where politicians, technocrats, diplomats, security experts, and academicians sit together with military and civil leadership to deliberate and design sustainable economic, social, and security frameworks.
Government circles argue that Justice Minallah’s statements project an image that Pakistan lacks rule of law and constitutional order, which they see as contrary to reality and harmful to state interests. They claim his remarks resemble those of a political leader rather than a sitting judge, showing bias toward a particular agenda and party.
His statements are frequently cited by a political party to malign state institutions, and he is also accused of playing a divisive role within the higher judiciary. This, critics say, was evident during the Faisal Vawda contempt case, where his explanatory note appeared five weeks late—prompting Senator Vawda to remark that Justice Minallah was waiting for an apology.
Justice Minallah has also faced criticism for his perceived leniency toward property tycoon Malik Riaz, often making remarks in court that seemed to portray Riaz positively. Other controversies include the case of Justice Babar Sattar’s U.S. Green Card, where Justice Sattar claimed he had informed then-Chief Justice Minallah of his status, but the Islamabad High Court failed to provide documentary proof when pressed by Senator Faisal Vawda.
Government officials further allege that Justice Minallah uses public forums to repeatedly criticize state institutions. They question why, if he truly believes the system is flawed and unconstitutional, he continues to serve within it rather than resigning.
Disclaimer:
The views and opinions expressed in this article/Opinion/Comment are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the DND Thought Center and Dispatch News Desk (DND). Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of the DND Thought Center and Dispatch News Desk.
