ISLAMABAD:
Like Pakistan’s general elections, elections within senior colleges have increasingly become a source of dispute in recent years.
What was once an internal professional exercise has now become a series of political and regulatory confrontations in multiple provinces.
Currently, several serious conflicts related to the elections of different bar associations remain unresolved. Questions are also being raised about the conduct of lawyers’ regulatory bodies, with accusations of bias in resolving electoral disputes.
Bar politics remain sharply divided between two dominant factions. The Independent Group, which has a majority in the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) and is widely regarded as the pro-government section of lawyers, and the Professional Group, which has strongly opposed the 26th and 27th constitutional amendments.
The Independent Group’s majority in the PBC, the legal community’s main regulatory body, gives it a decisive advantage in election-related disputes.
The latest controversy erupted after the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) elections held on Saturday.
The Independent Group has refused to accept the LHCBA result until a forensic audit of the biometric system used in the election is carried out.
Meanwhile, the electoral board has notified the result declaring the Professional Group candidate, Babar Murtaza Khan, president of the LHCBA by a margin of three thousand votes.
Subsequently, the Punjab Bar Council, where the Independent Group also has a majority, suspended the electoral board’s notification regarding the presidential result.
Both groups have now agreed to form a committee led by PBC vice-chairman Masood Chishti and Shafqat Chohan to conduct a forensic examination of the biometric system. The committee’s first meeting is scheduled for Tuesday.
A similar dispute continues over the Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA) elections.
Wajid Gilani, backed by the pro-government lawyers’ section, has been declared president of the IHCBA.
However, his opponent Ashraf Gujjar claims he won by nine votes and has challenged the result before the Islamabad Bar Council.
Gujjar now accuses the council of failing to decide the dispute quickly.
It is noteworthy that most of the members of the Islamabad Bar Council supported Wajid Gilani during the election campaign.
Meanwhile, the Pakistan Bar Council has stopped the Sindh Bar Council from holding the Karachi Bar elections, which have already been delayed by three months.
A member of the Professional Group alleges that the delay is intended to favor the executive.
Aamir Nawaz Waraich, a staunch opponent of the 26th and 27th constitutional amendments, is considered the favorite to become president of the Karachi Bar Association again.
According to critics, the executive does not want his reelection, which is why the elections are delayed.
‘Illegal interference’
However, the most serious institutional confrontation has emerged in Balochistan, where the Balochistan Bar Council (BBC) has formally accused the Pakistan Bar Council of overstepping its legal mandate and engaging in “unlawful interference” in provincial affairs.
The dispute centers on a January 14 order of the PBC Appellate Committee upholding the unopposed election of the Quetta Bar Association.
The BBC maintains that the order circumvents legal procedure, violates established legal norms and undermines the autonomy guaranteed by law to provincial bar councils.
The confrontation formally escalated when the BBC secretary, on instructions from his vice-president, sent a strongly worded letter to the chairman of the PBC Appellate Committee in Balochistan, registering an official protest against the committee’s decision to directly notify the president and cabinet of the Quetta Bar Association.
It is learned that the BBC had earlier suspended the Quetta Bar Council’s unopposed election. The aggrieved party then approached the PBC Appeals Committee, which issued the impugned directive.
The BBC, led by the Professional Group, has already protested the Judicial Commission of Pakistan’s decision to remove Balochistan High Court Additional Judge Ayub Tareen on the basis of his brother’s political affiliation. In contrast, the PBC is led by the Independent Group.
In its letter, the BBC stated that the PBC Appeal Committee’s order “lacked legal authority, was beyond jurisdiction, was ultra vires the Lawyers and Legal Practitioners Councils Act 1973 and was a flagrant intrusion into the exclusive legal domain of the BBC.”
“The power to supervise, regulate and notify elections and Bar Council officers rests solely and exclusively with the Provincial Bar Council. The appeal committee has no legal mandate to notify officers, assume administrative control or override the statutory functions of the Bar Council of Balochistan.”
“The impugned action amounts to usurpation of legal powers and is therefore void in the eyes of law. The Balochistan Bar Council is an autonomous, independent and self-regulatory statutory institution. Any attempt to interfere in its internal administration, electoral counting, notification process or disciplinary ambit is illegal, unconstitutional and unacceptable,” the letter states.
The BBC further argued that the January 14 order constituted a direct attack on institutional autonomy and set a dangerous precedent.
“Further, it is placed on record that the alleged uncontested electoral process of the Quetta Bar Council is and has been under serious legal and procedural scrutiny due to multiple deficiencies, including verification of voter list, eligibility of candidates, clearance of dues, neutrality and legal constitution of the Election Board, and compliance with the mandatory norms of the Bar Council.”
“Until these legal requirements are fully met, no notification can legally be issued. The Appellate Committee cannot compel the Balochistan Bar Council to endorse or legitimize a process that is legally questionable and under scrutiny,” the BBC said.
The letter emphasized that politics, group affiliations, personal loyalties, and external pressures must remain out of bar affairs, stating that bar institutions are not political arenas.
He warned that any perception of political maneuvering or favoritism seriously damages the credibility of the legal profession and objected that the PBC Appeals Committee passed its order without giving the BBC an opportunity to hear, in violation of the principles of natural justice and due process.
The BBC has formally warned the appeal committee against further interference and has stated that any continued invasion of its legal domain would force it to seek appropriate legal remedies before a competent forum to safeguard its autonomy and institutional integrity.
