Lawyers’ strike: How legitimate, how illegitimate

Lawyers have called for a strike across the country today. It can be said that the season of strikes is going on. They take a few days off, then the lawyers go on strike. How many days do you get justice? However, courts are being boycotted across the country. Only Cylians can describe it. The recent controversy has started with the transfer of courts in Lahore.

Some courts in Lahore have been shifted from one place to another. The lawyer community is of the opinion that why the airports were shifted to other places without asking them. Permission was not taken from them before the transfer of courts. So they completely reject this transfer. And till this transfer notification is withdrawn, the boycott of the courts will continue.

It is also worth noting that all groups of lawyers are united in this strike. All including Hamid Khan and Asma Jahangir group have supported this strike. Along with this, where a strike was called in the courts across the country, a complete boycott of the court of the Chief Justice Lahore High Court has been announced by the lawyers.

That is, on the day there is no strike even then no lawyer will appear in the court of Chief Justice Lahore High Court. Along with this, all lawyers’ organizations across the country have also announced to file a reference in the Supreme Judicial Council against the Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court.

The controversy between the Chief Justice and the Bar has also happened in the past. Rather, the conflict has become even more intense. By the way, we say that bar and bench are the two wheels of the system of justice. The balance between the bar and the bench seems to be tilted more towards the bar, with the bench now being the oppressed and the bar becoming powerful. The bar is attaching the bench to the wall. Even the bench has to bear repeated abuses. The bar locks the bench whenever it wants.

The Bar surrounds the Bench whenever it wants and we have seen that the Bench continues to be afraid of the Bar despite having numerous rights and powers. The bench does not even make a sound in front of the bar. From the bench bar now seems to be coming down from the position of persuasion. The victimization of the bench before the bar is not only deplorable but also pitiful. By the way, the bench has disturbed the entire government. But the bar system is troubling the justice system.

It has also come to light that this time in the Islamabad High Court, the cases of the lawyers who did not appear in the courts due to the strike have been dismissed. Similar reports have come from a few other courts. But most of the courts have put dates in the cases on the day of the strike.

No policy statement has yet come out from the Chief Justice Lahore High Court as to what policy he has made after the complete boycott of his court by the lawyers. Will they keep adding dates to the cases or will they drop the cases? There is complete silence on the matter from his side.

I personally do not consider the lawyers’ strike to be justified in any way. Lawyers charge their client a fee to fight the case. He is bound to appear in the court on the appointed date by taking the fee on behalf of the petitioner.

This is an agreement between the lawyer and the petitioner. Due to which the lawyer charges a fee to appear in the court instead of the questioner. When they do not appear in court, they violate the agreement made with the petitioner. They have no personal case, they are not doing this work for free. They appear in court for heavy fees. Therefore, boycotting the courts on their behalf is not correct both legally and morally. They abuse the questioner.

Similarly, even when the case is dismissed from the court after their non-appearance, the lawyer does not suffer any loss. It is the questioner’s loss, the case is the questioner’s, not the lawyer’s personal. You can argue that whether a lawyer appeared in the case or not is a matter for the petitioner and the lawyer. The court has nothing to do with it. If the lawyer is not appearing, it is the questioner’s problem. The petitioner may appear as a new lawyer.

But the problem of the court is not that the lawyer did not appear. The questioner has to take care whether the lawyer is present or not. This is legally correct. But everyone knows the truth. If the questioner has to guard the court or a lawyer, then what is the use of a lawyer? When there is a lawyer’s letter of attorney in the case, the lawyer is responsible for appearing.

Now the question is whether the action should be taken against the lawyer for not appearing in the court or the case should be dismissed. This is a difficult question. The court has no authority to take action against the lawyer. The agreement between the lawyer and the petitioner is in place, but despite being a lawyer in court, the case belongs to the petitioner. The case is dismissed’ whether relief is obtained in the case or not. The loser is the winner. So, if the courts start dismissing cases due to strike, it is difficult for Cylian’s lawyer, not so much loss.

So for me the important question is how the lawyers’ strike is legally permissible and how the strike can be thrown into the food of the damages claimant. By the way, the principle decision should be that lawyers cannot go on strike in any case. If they want to protest, they can do so before or after the court hours.

I cannot boycott courts during court hours. Appear in courts during the day and then protest as much as you want. Have a rally. Rally. Sit down outside the Chief Justice’s house but cannot strike. That is why they say that even if a war breaks out, the courts have to continue working. Lawyers have to appear in courts. If anyone coughs here, a strike is called.

How did the matter of lawyers where the court is to be held? This is an administrative matter. Where in the country should the courts be built? Well, this work should be done by the government. Is shifting of court from one place to another a valid justification for strike? I do not understand. Does this infringe any rights of lawyers? I do not understand. Should the Chief Justice take such a decision by asking them? No way. The government and the Chief Justice can consult. How and where did lawyers come from? You have to appear. Wherever the court is held, the lawyers have to appear.

Your petrol is high. Is this a valid reason? You charge more fees from the questioner. What are your fee rates set by the government? That you cannot charge more than that. Therefore, the lawyers community should sit together and think about ending this strike culture. Judiciary should also pass such orders where action can be taken against lawyer in case of non-appearance. The right of Cylian must be preserved. The lawyer must be held responsible.