In a significant judicial pronouncement on Thursday, Pakistan’s Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) clarified its jurisdictional boundaries by ruling that it does not possess the authority to entertain appeals against the Supreme Court’s final decisions. This ruling underscores the constitutional framework that restricts prolonged litigation and reinforces the principle that once the highest court has delivered its verdict, the matter is conclusively settled.
Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan, delivering the written judgment, highlighted that the 27th Amendment to the Constitution does not empower the FCC to review or supervise rulings made by the Supreme Court. This interpretation firmly establishes that the FCC’s role is not to act as a higher appellate body over the Supreme Court, thereby preserving the hierarchical judicial order and preventing any potential overlap or conflict between the two institutions.
The court further elaborated on the scope of cases it can entertain, emphasizing that disputes involving private land compensation, while important in their own right, do not qualify as matters of public interest under Article 184(3) of the Constitution. This article grants the Supreme Court extraordinary jurisdiction primarily for cases that affect the public at large or involve fundamental constitutional questions, rather than individual or private grievances. By distinguishing these categories, the FCC has set clear parameters to avoid misuse of constitutional provisions for personal legal battles.
The ruling came in response to a review petition challenging the Supreme Court’s order dated September 12, 2024, which the FCC decisively rejected. Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan pointed out that the concept of corrective review cannot be used as a tool to reopen final Supreme Court decisions. Article 188 of the Constitution, the right to seek a review is narrowly defined, and once the Supreme Court refuses to entertain such a petition, the case is effectively closed and cannot be re-litigated in any other forum.
The underlying dispute involved a land compensation case between the petitioner and the Multan Development Authority. The petitioner contended that a three-member bench of the Supreme Court had ruled in their favor back in 2015. However, this verdict was later overturned by a two-member bench in 2022, leading to the subsequent legal challenges. The FCC’s ruling now brings finality to this prolonged legal battle, signaling an end to the petitioner’s attempts to seek further judicial intervention.
This decision by the Federal Constitutional Court reinforces the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the finality of Supreme Court judgments and maintaining judicial discipline. It also serves as a reminder that the constitutional amendments and provisions are designed to streamline the legal process and prevent endless litigation, which can drain judicial resources and delay justice. Moving forward, this ruling is expected to clarify the limits of the FCC’s jurisdiction and guide future litigants on the appropriate avenues for seeking legal redress.
