LAHORE: Lawyers on Monday observed a partial strike, demanding that Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz withdraw her ‘unnecessary and irresponsible’ statements after Lahore High Court Chief Justice Aalia Neelum suspended a controversial law empowering the deputy commissioners to decide property disputes.
The Punjab Bar Council (PbBC) had given a call for strike with a warning of launching a formal movement against the provincial government’s, what it claims, anti-judiciary attitude.
A PbBC statement said the order issued by the chief justice, staying the implementation of the property ownership protection law was a true reflection of the Constitution, the supremacy of law and the independence of the judiciary.
It stated that the bar clearly demands that the chief minister withdraw her unnecessary and irresponsible statement issued after the court’s order.
The bar said the government’s ministers, advisers and other representatives are continuously engaging in trolling and misleading propaganda against the judiciary, particularly against the LHC chief justice, which is condemnable and contrary to constitutional values.
The statement said unwarranted criticism and character assassination of the judiciary is, in fact, an attempt to suppress and weaken an independent judiciary, causing serious concern and unrest within the legal fraternity.
It stated that if the chief minister does not withdraw her statement, the bar reserves the right to further expand the protest movement within the constitutional, legal and democratic framework.
COMPLAINT: A Lahore-based lawyer has filed a complaint with the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) against LHC Chief Justice Aalia Neelum, alleging misconduct over remarks attributed to her during proceedings challenging the Punjab Protection of Ownership of Immovable Property Act, 2025.
The complaint, submitted by Advocate Muhammad Akmal Khan, claims that certain remarks made by the chief justice while hearing petitions against the Act — and widely circulated by electronic, print and social media — were “sarcastic, prejudicial and unbecoming” of the office of a chief justice.
He argues that the remarks allegedly criticised the Punjab government and district administration, creating tension between the judiciary and the executive.
He contends that the Act was enacted by the provincial legislature to provide swift relief to vulnerable citizens and curb land grabbing. He says ridiculing a duly enacted law during court proceedings was unjustified.
The complainant has urged the Supreme Judicial Council to conduct an independent inquiry into the matter and take action against those responsible.
He pleads that if it is proven the ‘sarcastic’ remarks were uttered by the chief justice, she should be punished under the charge of misconduct and, otherwise, the media persons responsible for misinformation causing agony, torture to the nation should be strictly punished in the best interest of justice.
Published in media, December 30th, 2025
American Dollar Exchange Rate