ISLAMABAD:
Former Supreme Court judge Mansoor Ali Shah on Monday raised serious doubts over the higher judiciary’s proposal to establish an International Commercial Court of Pakistan (ICCP) through a constitutional amendment, saying the ICCP could not become a destination for global trade unless Pakistan first restores confidence in the rule of law, judicial independence and constitutional governance.
talking to The express PAkGazettesaid former Supreme Court Justice Mansoor Ali Shah until those foundations are firmly established, the creation of a new court risks being perceived as a cosmetic reform rather than a meaningful reform.
Justice Shah said institutions cannot be created simply by advertisement. “The proposal to establish an International Commercial Court of Pakistan raises more questions than it answers, as the announcement does not provide details on the jurisdiction, composition, appeals structure, procedural law, relationship with arbitration or whether international judges will be appointed of the proposed court. Without these essential elements, any meaningful evaluation is impossible.”
The former SC judge further stated that international commercial courts do not derive credibility from constitutional amendments or legislation as they derive it from the legal ecosystem in which they operate. “Investors evaluate the independence of judges, the certainty of the law, the enforceability of contracts, respect for arbitration awards and the absence of executive interference. They invest in institutions, not slogans.”
The retired judge stated that jurisdictions such as Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Qatar are often cited as successful examples. Their political systems may differ from constitutional democracies, but they have consciously built systems of trade justice that inspire international confidence.
“They have not suffered from the perception that their commercial courts have been institutionally captured or staffed with judges who lack independence. Their commitment to the rule of commercial law is precisely what gives investors confidence,” he added.
He further stated that Pakistan presents a different picture. It remains based on the antiquated Arbitration Act of 1940, which embodies a philosophy of extensive judicial intervention rather than modern arbitration.
“More importantly, trust in any commercial court ultimately depends on trust in the judiciary itself. If judicial independence is questioned, no specialized commercial court can overcome that institutional deficit,” he added.
Lawyer Asad Rahim Khan said it is quite incredible, at a time when the constitutionality of historically regressive amendments has not even been touched for years, that the court would care about such matters. “This is our new language of rights: QR codes, light bulbs, digitalization, commerce, while incredible sentences are handed down to lawyers like Imaan Mazari and Hadi Chattha.”
Former federal minister Fawad Chaudhry, who is also an advocate, said the pursuit of structural expansion through greater bureaucracy or new courts ignores the underlying crisis of institutional legitimacy.
“The 26th and 27th amendments have catalyzed a sharp decline in judicial credibility. To move forward, we must abandon superficial fixes and undertake comprehensive structural reform, based on a commitment to merit and public accountability,” says Fawad Chaudhry.
However, advocate Abdul Moiz Jaferii said that considering that Pakistani companies would do anything to keep their disputes out of the Pakistani legal system, it is hilarious that the LJCP considers that an international trade court is viable in this country.
“In the name of expediency, we have tried to create exceptions on multiple occasions; instead of trying to solve the problems faced by the judicial system itself. We created terrorism courts to catch terrorists, banking courts to speed up the justice process there, drug courts and lately the constitutional court.”
Jaferii further states that, rather than creating another exception to the delays and lack of competence that he complains about, it would be better to focus on raising the level of judicial delivery through the normal route and through the normal courts.
The former judicial officer, commenting on the proposal, states that the result would be more courts, more appointments, more protocols and endless benefits.
“What business judges have when proposing laws. Their constitutional obligation to interpret laws and decide cases and not as advisers to parliament.”
However, Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar welcomed the proposal. He termed the recommendation as a landmark constitutional and judicial reform that is the need of the hour to strengthen Pakistan’s commercial justice system and support sustainable economic growth.
He noted that specialized commercial courts have become a defining feature of successful economies, citing the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC), the UK Commercial and Property Courts, the Dubai International Financial Center (DIFC) Courts, the Abu Dhabi Global Market Courts (ADGM) and the Delaware Court of Chancery in the United States as globally recognized models. These institutions have substantially improved the resolution of commercial disputes by providing specialized judges, fast procedures, predictable results and internationally respected rulings, thereby strengthening investor confidence and attracting foreign investment.
According to Khokhar, Pakistan needs to adopt a similar institutional model to meet the growing demands of international trade and cross-border investment.
He emphasized that the proposed Federal Commercial Court should have exclusive jurisdiction over high-value commercial disputes, international commercial contracts, foreign investment disputes, cross-border business and commercial transactions, banking and finance, corporate and shareholder disputes, mergers and acquisitions, infrastructure and energy projects, public-private partnerships, insurance and reinsurance matters, insolvency and restructuring, shipping and maritime claims, intellectual property, e-commerce, competition law and all matters related to arbitration, including recognition and the execution of national and foreign decisions. arbitration awards.
