The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday sought a formal reply from the Punjab Bar Council (PbBC) on the controversial suspension of Barrister Ali Ashfaq’s licence, brought after his role as counsel for social media personality Rajab Butt stirred debate across the legal community.
Advocate Mian Ali Ashfaq, whose licence was suspended by the PbBC for appearing before the Karachi City Courts during a lawyers’ strike, filed a petition challenging the disciplinary action, calling it “unlawful and prejudicial.” The PbBC alleges Ashfaq’s conduct violated professional norms by representing his client amidst a protest that barred court proceedings.
During Monday’s proceedings before Justice Malik Muhammad Awais Khalid, the LHC directed the PbBC to submit an official response and clarified procedural aspects after objections were raised concerning the impleading of the Karachi Bar Association. The court granted time for compliance and deferred detailed hearing to a later date.
The suspension of Ashfaq’s licence followed public outrage and protests after videos on social media showed him inside the Karachi court on behalf of Rajab Butt, a YouTuber and TikToker facing multiple legal challenges, including alleged hurt to religious sentiments and cybercrime‑related cases. Ashfaq had strongly condemned the reported assault on his client, calling the violence “unprofessional” and harmful to the judiciary’s reputation.
Legal observers say the case raises broader questions about lawyer autonomy and professional rights, especially as rights bodies have criticized the PbBC’s action as disproportionate and a threat to judicial independence in Pakistan.
Earlier this week, lawyers protested in Karachi over the ongoing Rajab Butt situation, leading to court closures and nationwide legal community reactions, underscoring rising tensions in Pakistan’s justice system.
The LHC’s call for a reply on Ali Ashfaq’s licence suspension marks a significant stage in the legal battle, signaling a careful judicial review of disciplinary powers and lawyers’ professional freedoms.
