Pakistan’s prominent female lawyer has lodged a formal harassment complaint against Islamabad’s top judge, escalating a tense courtroom clash into a wider controversy that has stirred the legal community, according to “The Express Tribune”.
The complaint, filed before the Women’s Harassment Inquiry Committee of the Islamabad High Court and led by Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz, accuses Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar of making gender-based and threatening remarks during a hearing last week. The lawyer has urged an inquiry under the Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act and asked that the matter be referred to the Supreme Judicial Council, the body empowered to review judicial conduct.
The altercation unfolded during a hearing on a petition seeking to remove activist Mahrang Baloch’s name from the Exit Control List. Representing the petitioner, the lawyer sparred with Islamabad’s top judge after he bristled at her arguments. “You should keep your mouth shut and stay within the limits of respect,” he warned, accusing her of calling him a “dictator.” He further remarked: “She will go downstairs and hold a program saying a dictator is sitting in court.”
The lawyer defended herself, arguing that her personal views outside court did not diminish her professional role. Tensions heightened as the judge raised the possibility of contempt proceedings, later telling her husband and fellow advocate, “Explain it to her… if I catch her someday…”
The exchange drew swift backlash. Several bar associations issued statements condemning the judge’s conduct, with the Lahore High Court Bar Association calling for his removal.
Responding a day later, the chief justice sought to temper the storm, saying his words had been misinterpreted. “She is like a daughter to me,” he said, insisting he had only cautioned her against making personal comments about judges.
Unconvinced, the lawyer filed an application requesting access to CCTV footage from the courtroom, submitting a USB drive to facilitate its release. She has emphasized that she was present solely as counsel, not as an activist, and expected the same professional respect she offered the bench.
