By ABDULLAH Rights activist and lawyer Imaan Mazari has formally requested the Islamabad High Court (IHC) registrar to preserve CCTV footage of what she termed an “unfortunate incident” during court proceedings with IHC Chief Justice (CJ) Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar earlier this week.
The application, shared by Mazari on X (formerly Twitter), asked the registrar to secure footage from Courtroom No. 1 between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on September 11, 2025. She also attached a USB to receive a copy of the footage, underscoring the seriousness of the matter.
The incident occurred during a case where Mazari was representing her client, who sought the removal of activist Mahrang Baloch’s name from the Exit Control List (ECL). Reports suggest that during the hearing, CJ Dogar warned Mazari of contempt of court and allegedly made remarks perceived as threatening, including “getting hold of her.”
Mazari defended her conduct, stating she was only fulfilling her professional duty and was ready to face contempt proceedings if necessary.
A day later, Justice Dogar addressed the controversy during another hearing. He denied making any threats and said his remarks were taken “out of context.” According to him, Mazari is “like a daughter” to him, and he had only been trying to explain legal points in a fatherly manner.
“I was explaining to her just as I would to a child, but she was not understanding. She was repeatedly mentioning fundamental rights. Does this court not have any fundamental rights?” Justice Dogar remarked.
He added that he never used the words attributed to him about “getting hold of” Mazari and instead asked her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, who was present, to take her aside so that the situation did not escalate into contempt proceedings.
Despite the clarification, the incident has sparked strong reactions across Pakistan’s legal circles.
- The Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) condemned the remarks, urging the Supreme Judicial Council to remove Justice Dogar, stressing that lawyers, as “officers of the court,” deserve dignity and respect.
- The Balochistan Bar Council and the Karachi Bar Association (KBA) also issued similar statements, calling the Chief Justice’s conduct “highly inappropriate.”
- The Women’s Action Forum (WAF) went further, denouncing what it described as “patriarchal, misogynistic, and anti-women language.”
A group of female lawyers also signed a joint condemnation, calling Justice Dogar’s comments “sexist, threatening, and unbecoming of a judge.” They reminded that contempt laws exist to protect the administration of justice, not to silence lawyers or assert personal authority.
One section of the joint statement quoted Lord Denning, a famous British judge:
“We will never use this jurisdiction as a means to uphold our own dignity. That must rest on surer foundations. Nor will we use it to suppress those who speak against us. There is something far more important at stake – no less than freedom of speech itself.”
The controversy has now moved beyond a personal exchange between a lawyer and a judge. For many, it reflects the deep-rooted patriarchal attitudes still present in the justice system. Female lawyers argue that dismissive or paternalistic language undermines their professional credibility and discourages women from pursuing careers in law.
This incident has also reignited debate about the use of contempt powers in Pakistan’s courts. Critics say contempt should not be used to stifle legitimate arguments or criticism of judicial conduct. Instead, it must be reserved for protecting the integrity of legal proceedings.
Mazari’s application for the preservation of CCTV footage could become a crucial turning point. If the footage is preserved and shared, it may either validate her stance or support Justice Dogar’s clarification. Either way, it will set an important precedent for accountability and transparency within the judiciary.
For now, the legal community and the public are watching closely. This controversy has raised uncomfortable but necessary questions: How should judges exercise authority? Where is the line between respect for the court and the rights of lawyers? And most importantly, how can Pakistan’s judicial system evolve to ensure gender equality and impartial justice?