Are Federal Constitutional Court and Supreme Court are equal in status?
Why this matters: local context for readers following news across Pakistan and the region.
ISLAMABAD – The Supreme Court has issued a detailed judgment defining the jurisdiction of the apex court and the Federal Constitutional Court in light of the 27th Constitutional Amendment. A two-member bench headed by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi ruled that both courts are equal in status and do not function under each other. The judgment made it clear that the Federal Constitutional Court’s rulings on legal principles would be binding on other courts, adding that Article 189 does not establish a hierarchy between the two institutions. The court observed that hearing constitutional and non-constitutional cases together may lead to legal complications. It directed that such cases be separated, with constitutional matters to be heard by the Federal Constitutional Court and regular civil cases to remain with the Supreme Court. Emphasising the need to avoid conflicting judgments, the ruling highlighted the importance of maintaining “judicial comity,” ensuring mutual respect between the courts while exercising their respective jurisdictions. According to the verdict, appeals arising from constitutional petitions filed under Article 199 will be heard by the Federal Constitutional Court, while ordinary civil and regular appeals will continue to fall under the Supreme Court’s domain. The judgment further held that the Federal Constitutional Court was granted exclusive constitutional jurisdiction after the 27th Amendment. The appeals against constitutional rulings of high courts would be treated as transferred to the Federal Constitutional Court while certain matters, including tenancy disputes and specific family cases would remain outside its scope. The Supreme Court also ordered the separation of cases linked to a joint decision of the Peshawar High Court. Civil appeals would continue to be heard by the Supreme Court, whereas constitutional appeals were to be transferred to the Federal Constitutional Court. On the issue of contempt of court, the ruling held that such