ISLAMABAD:
The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has ruled that strikes called by bar associations and councils are not only illegal but also violate a litigant’s constitutional right to access justice, holding that such actions deprive citizens of legal representation and place an additional burden on an already strained judicial system.
In a detailed 20-page judgment written by Justice Aamer Farooq, the FCC upheld a Peshawar High Court (PHC) ruling that restored the practicing licenses of two lawyers.
The court observed that lawyer strikes amount to a denial of access to justice and cannot be justified, regardless of the cause behind them. “The practice of calling for strikes by bar associations or bar councils is common in the subcontinent. This practice is not only illegal but also violates the right of access to justice of a litigant and his lawyer,” Justice Aamer Farooq said during the hearing of the Bar Association of the Peshawar High Court against the PHC order reinstating the practicing license of two lawyers.
The ruling observed that when a strike is called, lawyers’ bodies restrict lawyers from appearing in court. “So, in essence, a litigant, on that day, is deprived of his attorney’s right to represent him, and the hearing in his case is adjourned without any progress in the case.”
According to the facts of the case, the matter arose from the murder of a young lawyer, in which a police station officer was involved.
An FIR was duly registered and the incident sparked protests demanding that the officer be brought to justice. The officer later surrendered in court and was taken into custody. He later hired lawyer Shabbir Hussain Gigyani as his lawyer.
These developments led the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Bar Council to pass a resolution prohibiting any lawyer from representing the accused official.
Meanwhile, lawyer Ali Azim Afridi faced disciplinary proceedings when the executive committee of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Bar Council suspended his license in an emergency meeting convened on October 8, 2025.
The suspension followed a communication from the Peshawar Bar Council, which cited his appearance in court during a declared strike as an act of “indiscipline”.
The defendants challenged the suspension of their licenses before the APS, which allowed their writ petitions through a consolidated judgment.
‘Denial of access to justice’
A division of the FCC, headed by Judge Aamer Farooq, held that attorney strikes amount to a denial of access to justice.
“Our legal system is already overloaded and the lists of cases before the courts are numerous and the litigant has to wait years and years for the matter to be resolved and in such a situation the call for strike by the legal bodies adds to the difficult situation of the litigant.”
The court further observed: “Regardless of how noble the cause of lawyers’ strike may be, it is neither the solution nor the way to express their concern as it comes at the cost of a litigant hoping for his grievance to be redressed or justice to be done.”
“Denial of access to justice in any form is a violation of the Constitution, whether in the form of failure to appear in court or the closure of the work of administrative or judicial courts.”
The FCC held that preventing attorneys from representing litigants or appearing in court is completely impermissible.
