Islamabad High Court issues statement on ‘malicious’ social media campaign against Justice Sattar
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has stepped forward to address a “false, malicious and contemptuous” social media campaign targeting Justice Babar Sattar, denouncing it as false and malicious. In a statement issued on April 28, the IHC categorically stated that Justice Sattar has exclusively held Pakistani nationality throughout his life, countering rumors suggesting otherwise.
The statement further revealed that confidential information pertaining to Justice Sattar, including travel documents of himself, his wife, and children, had been unlawfully shared on social media platforms. Additionally, details from his tax returns concerning his properties were disclosed accompanied by baseless accusations.
According to the IHC’s public relations officer, Justice Babar Sattar pursued his legal education at prestigious institutions like Oxford University and Harvard Law School, after which he practiced law with a firm in New York. Following his tenure in the US, where he was granted a green card due to his exceptional abilities, Justice Sattar returned to Pakistan in 2005 and has since resided and worked in the country.
The statement clarified that the properties listed in Justice Sattar’s tax returns, both in Pakistan and the US, were thoroughly scrutinized by the Judicial Commission of Pakistan prior to his appointment as a judge. All assets owned by Justice Sattar were either inherited or acquired during his legal career, and he has not acquired any real estate since assuming his position as a judge.
The IHC emphasized that Justice Sattar has no involvement in the management of any business entity and has not presided over cases in which his family members have interests. The statement concluded by reaffirming the court’s commitment to upholding the Code of Conduct for judges, ensuring accountability to the people of Pakistan.
It’s noteworthy that Justice Sattar was among the six IHC judges who recently raised concerns about alleged interference by intelligence agencies in judicial affairs, seeking guidance from the Supreme Judicial Council.
” 
” 
” 
” 
” 
