Introduction
A growing public campaign has been launched across Pakistan demanding the reassignment of sensitive blasphemy-related cases from Justice Ijaz Ishaq of the Islamabad High Court, citing concerns over perceived bias and controversial judicial conduct.
Activists and concerned citizens have taken to social media, petitions, and public discourse to highlight what they describe as a pattern of troubling decisions in cases involving allegations of “pornographic blasphemy.” The campaign gained momentum following the judge’s return to handling multiple high-profile matters after a period of relative absence from the spotlight.
Controversial Judgment of July 15, 2025
The current wave of criticism traces back to a judgment delivered by Justice Ijaz Ishaq on July 15, 2025. In that ruling, the judge directed the constitution of a commission to inquire into blasphemy allegations in a matter that was already under trial before competent courts. Legal observers and the divisional bench of the Islamabad High Court later took strong exception to this approach.
The divisional bench suspended the judgment, observing that forming such a commission appeared to be an intervention in the functioning of competent trial courts. Critics argue that the order violated the requirements of Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan, which governs the jurisdiction of High Courts. They maintain that commissions are only appropriate where no other legal remedy exists, whereas trial courts themselves provide a full and proper legal forum for adjudication of such cases.
The suspended judgment was widely viewed as fragile and procedurally questionable, leading to significant public and legal backlash.
Fresh Concerns Over Bail Decisions
Since resuming active adjudication of blasphemy-related cases, Justice Ijaz Ishaq has come under renewed scrutiny for his approach to bail applications. Campaigners allege several disturbing patterns, including:
- Relying primarily on arguments from the bail petitioner’s counsel while giving little or no weight to evidence presented by the Additional Advocate General (AAG).
- Granting bails in hearings where the respondents’ counsel was not present or properly represented.
- Appearing to prioritize one side’s submissions over a balanced consideration of the prosecution’s case.
These practices, according to petitioners in the public campaign, have raised serious questions about fairness and adherence to established principles of criminal procedure in highly sensitive cases that affect religious sentiments across the country.
Public Demand for Reassignment
The ongoing campaign calls upon the Chief Justice of the Islamabad High Court to withdraw blasphemy and related sensitive cases from Justice Ijaz Ishaq and assign them to other benches. Organizers emphasize that their demand is rooted in preserving public confidence in the judiciary and upholding the appearance of impartiality, especially in matters involving blasphemy where societal sensitivities are extremely high.
Representations are being made through lawful and respectful channels, including formal emails and petitions to the office of the Chief Justice. Citizens are encouraged to write polite, fact-based letters highlighting the public record of the suspended judgment and subsequent concerns.
A campaign spokesperson stated: “We respect the judiciary and its independence. Our only request is that justice must not only be done but must manifestly be seen to be done, particularly in cases that have the potential to disturb communal harmony.”
As the campaign gathers pace, legal experts and civil society members continue to monitor developments. The Islamabad High Court has not yet issued any official statement regarding the reassignment requests.
