Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani resigns as LHC judge, cites 'executive's growing control' over judiciary - The Express Tribune

Lahore High Court (LHC) Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani tendered his resignation on Wednesday, citing personal reasons, including health concerns, and what he described as growing executive interference in judicial affairs following the 26th and 27th Constitutional Amendments.

"In my considered view, the changes introduced through the 26th and 27th Constitutional Amendments have compromised the independence and institutional integrity of the high courts," said Justice Kayani in his resignation letter submitted to the president.

Justice Kayani, who was transferred from the Islamabad High Court (IHC) to the LHC in May this year, was serving at the court's principal seat. Under the newly issued judges' roster, he was reassigned to the Rawalpindi bench. He was due to retire in 2032, ranked second in seniority at the IHC before his transfer and 10th at the LHC.

In his resignation letter, Justice Kayani said it had been his privilege to serve at the IHC and the LHC.

"These years of judicial service remain among the most meaningful and fulfilling of my life. During my tenure, I have disposed of more than 23,000 cases of various categories, endeavouring always to uphold the Constitution, safeguard fundamental rights, and administer justice without fear or favour," he stated.

He further said that the executive's increasing influence over judicial institutions had weakened public confidence in the justice system.

"I have witnessed what I regard as the executive's growing control over judicial institutions, extending to the appointment and transfer of judges. Such interference has, in my assessment, seriously eroded public confidence in judicial independence and the fairness of the judicial process," he wrote.

Justice Kayani also noted his particular concern regarding “the plight of the ordinary litigant,” whom he said was “the principal stakeholder in the justice system, yet whose suffering continues to deepen.” He argued that the needs of those seeking justice “have too often been neglected, while other actors become the beneficiaries of a system intended to serve them.”

In these circumstances, he wrote, “my conscience does not permit me to continue on the Bench,” terming this decision a painful one but one that reflected his “conviction that judicial office must remain inseparable from independence, fidelity to the Constitution, and the protection of human dignity.”

Justice Kayani said that he would return to legal practice “through which I intend to continue serving the people, protecting their rights and promoting legal awareness.”

Justice Kayani, known for his rulings on human rights matters, particularly cases involving enforced disappearances, was elevated to the IHC bench in December 2015. Over the years, he presided over several high-profile cases concerning fundamental rights and enforced disappearances. He was also a vocal critic of the 27th Amendment and had remarked on it during its passage last year.

In April this year, the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) approved the transfer of Kayani to the LHC, Justice Babar Sattar to the Peshawar High Court (PHC) and Justice Saman Riffat Imtiaz to the Sindh High Court (SHC).

The development marked the first instance of the 27th Amendment, approved in November last year, being applied directly to the high courts. This followed amendments to Article 200, which removed the requirement of obtaining a judge’s consent before transfer and empowered the relocation of high court judges between provinces on the recommendation of the JCP.

The three judges who were transferred were also among the six IHC judges who had written a letter to the Supreme Judicial Council, seeking guidance on how to counter alleged interference by intelligence agencies in their affairs.

In February 2025, when Justice Sardar Sarfraz Dogar was elevated to the position of IHC chief justice from the LHC, the same three judges were among a group of five who refused to accept his elevation. They raised concerns regarding his seniority and questioned the legitimacy of his appointment.

Despite these reservations, Justice Dogar took the oath as the IHC chief justice just a week later. However, the five judges who had expressed their concerns did not attend the oath-taking ceremony, despite being formally invited.

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, redistributed or derived from. Unless otherwise stated, all content is copyrighted © 2026 The Express Tribune.