ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court and the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) are parallel courts, not subordinate to each other, adjudged a two-member bench of the Supreme Court.
The bench comprised Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan. The judgment on a set of petitions came against a common judgment passed by the Peshawar High Court (PHC) on February 17, 2020.The bench held that both the Supreme Court and Federal Constitutional Courts were parallel courts, not subordinate to each other.The bench clarified that Article 189 made none of the two apex courts subordinate to another.
“The Article 189(1), while operating to secure consistency in the exposition of legal principles, does not displace the independent jurisdiction of either court to finally determine matters before it,” said a 13-parge judgment authored by the chief justice.
The court held that the appellate routes to the two apex courts were ultimately constitutionally distinct and operated independently, insofar as the outcomes of individual cases were concerned.
“The constitutional scheme does not position either of the two apex courts as an appellate forum to each other, rather it treats both as coordinate courts exercising clearly demarcated jurisdictions over distinct classes of matters,” says the judgment
The court noted that any broader construction of Article 189(1) would have the effect of subordinating one apex court to the other in respect of proceedings constitutionally assigned to fall under the jurisdiction, a result for which there is no warrant in the constitutional text.
The court held that the decisions of Federal Constitutional Court will be binding on other courts in matters of legal principles. The court noted that hearing constitutional and non-constitutional cases together might create constitutional complications.
The court held that constitutional cases will be heard by the Federal Constitutional Court and regular cases by the Supreme Court. To avoid conflicting judgments, the principle of “judicial comity” will be adopted”, said the judgment adding that both courts will respect each other’s jurisdiction while issuing decisions.
The court also held that the appeals filed under Article 199 (constitutional petitions) will be heard by the Federal Constitutional Court while jurisdiction over ordinary civil and regular appeals will remain with the Supreme Court as well. The court noted that after the 27th Amendment, the Federal Constitutional Court had been granted a special constitutional jurisdiction.
The court further noted that appeals against constitutional decisions of high courts will be deemed transferred to the Federal Constitutional Court.Similarly, the court noted that rent matters and certain family matters will be excluded from the jurisdiction of Federal Constitutional Court while civil nature appeals will continue to be heard in the Supreme Court.
Referring to matters related to the contempt case, the court held that contempt of court cases will be heard by the same court whose order was violated adding that contempt proceedings related to violations of Supreme Court orders will be conducted in the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on Wednesday dismissed appeals filed against the cancellation of the allotment of 577 kanals of land located in Murree, and directed that possession of the land—worth over Rs 40 billion—be handed over to the Punjab government.
A two-member bench comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice KK Agha heard the appeals. During the hearing, the petitioner’s lawyer argued that how could the land allotment be declared illegal after several decades, especially when the law under which it was declared illegal did not even exist at the time of allotment. In response, Additional Advocate General (AAG) Waseem Mumtaz Malik argued that under the settlement scheme, only agricultural land could be allotted, whereas the land in question is located in an urban area. “Therefore, the allotment was flawed from the very beginning,” he said, adding: “If the foundation itself is illegal, how the structure built upon it can be considered valid.”
Justice Farooq inquired as to who was currently using the land. The AAG replied that part of the land was being used for the construction of Kohsar University, adding that some portions were under the use of Girls Guides and Scouts, and the land under the government control was being used for public purposes.
He also mentioned that some portions of the land still needed to be vacated by the government, and that the land will also be utilised for the Murree beautification project.Subsequently, the court dismissed the appeals against the cancellation of the allotment and disposed of the case, directing that possession of the land—valued at over Rs 40 billion—be handed over to the Punjab government.
