PESHAWAR  -  The recent passage of the 26th constitutional amendment by Par­liament has been widely hailed in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, where le­gal experts have termed it a signif­icant step toward the speedy reso­lution of constitutional cases and the clearance of the backlog of civ­il cases in the Supreme Court and high courts, providing much-need­ed relief to thousands of litigants.

Legal experts, politicians, and civil society representatives agreed that this historic amend­ment marks a pivotal moment in the quest for a more efficient and independent judiciary in Pakistan. The amendment introduces sev­eral important judicial reforms aimed at enhancing the judicial system and ensuring the suprem­acy of the rule of law in Pakistan.

Among its notable provisions is the establishment of a fixed three-year term for the Chief Justice of Pakistan, along with the crea­tion of constitutional benches in both the Supreme Court and high courts across all four provinces. These changes are seen as vital steps in ensuring swift and effec­tive justice delivery.

Furthermore, a judicial commis­sion, empowered to determine the necessary number of judges for these benches, will play a key role in optimizing the judicial process. This commission will not only oversee appointments but will also assess judges’ performance, reinforcing accountability within the judiciary.

The amendment also signifi­cantly enhances the role of Par­liament in judicial appointments. A new 12-member parliamenta­ry committee will nominate the Chief Justice of Pakistan from a panel of the three most senior judges. This committee requires a two-thirds majority to confirm its nominations, and the proposed CJP’s name will be submitted to the Prime Minister for endorse­ment, who will forward it to the President for final approval. This procedural change aims to ensure greater transparency and over­sight in the appointment of judi­cial leaders.

Noman Bukhari, a senior law­yer and member of the Pesha­war High Court Bar Association, praised the establishment of con­stitutional benches, calling it a “right step in a positive direction.” He emphasised that these reforms could lead to quicker resolutions for litigants’ cases, thereby restor­ing public confidence in the judi­cial system. He believed that by addressing key constitutional is­sues and facilitating a more organ­ized judiciary, the 26th amend­ment could play a transformative role in Pakistan’s legal landscape. It represents a concerted effort to tackle the backlog of cases that has plagued the courts for years, ensuring that justice is not only served but also seen to be served in a timely manner.

He mentioned that such consti­tutional benches existed in oth­er countries due to their key role in the speedy resolution of cases and the swift clearance of back­logs. He said the backlog of cas­es had increased in recent years in the Supreme Court and high courts due to heightened pub­lic awareness, and the establish­ment of constitutional benches would help minimize the work­load on higher courts. He not­ed that cases related to proper­ty, land, services, and criminal offenses were taking years to be finalized due to the extra time consumed by petitions.

He added that the time and mon­ey of thousands of litigants were being wasted, leading to frustra­tion due to delays in judgment. Re­ferring to a report, he mentioned that as of December 31, 2023, the backlog of cases stood at 55,971, while the number of pending cas­es by the end of 2022 was 52,424. The number of pending cases in 2021 was around 54,000 in the Supreme Court. In 2020, the num­ber of such cases was 46,902; in 2019, it was 43,800; and in 2018, there were 38,197 pending cases. Similarly, in 2017, around 35,600 cases were pending adjudication; 29,941 in 2016; 25,681 in 2015; 21,272 in 2014; and 20,116 in 2013.

Noman Bukhari said these sta­tistics indicated that the number of pending cases in the apex court has more than doubled in the last 10 years. 

He claimed that one of the rea­sons for the high backlog was that decisions in many cases were po­tentially extending over years due to a lack of judges in higher courts and the extra time consumed by constitutional and human rights petitions.

He referred to the book Pas-e-Qanoon, written by former CJP Jawad S Khawaja, who articulat­ed that the adjudication of a civ­il case typically spans an average of 25 years before a final verdict is reached. He said this raised an im­portant question of who would be held accountable for the loss of a person’s life or over two decades spent either in prison or in courts seeking justice.

Malik Ashfaq Khan, a senior law­yer and member of the Nowshera District Bar, said that the 26th constitutional amendment was important legislation as it would help in the expeditious disposal of constitutional and other petitions. He mentioned that the prevalence of political and constitutional cas­es had significantly impacted civil, criminal, and service cases of liti­gants, leading to notable strain on the justice system.

Malik Ashfaq noted that consti­tutional-related cases constitut­ed only 15 percent of the total cas­es, while 85 percent were other types of cases, yet the former mo­nopolized about 90 percent of the court’s time.