FCC affirms all other courts, including SC, are ‘constitutionally mandated’ to adhere to its judgements

The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has affirmed that all other courts in the country, including the Supreme Court, are required to “adhere” to its judgements.

The observation was made by a two-member FCC bench, comprising Justices Aamer Farooq and Rozi Khan Barrech, as it rejected a plea wherein the petitioner claimed a piece of land that was resumed from his father’s holding in the 1970s.

The order read: “Article 189 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan stipulates that any decision rendered by the Supreme Court, which resolves a question of law or enunciates a principle of law, is binding upon all other courts within Pakistan, with the exception of the Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan.

“This exception arises from the 27th Amendment to the Constitution, which establishes that decisions issued by the Federal Constitutional Court are binding on all courts in Pakistan, including the Supreme Court itself. Consequently, all courts in Pakistan are constitutionally mandated to adhere to the judgments of the Federal Constitutional Court.”

Citing Article 190 of the Constitution, the bench also observed that the provision “imposes an obligation on all executive authorities“ to act in accordance with the judgments of the FCC.

“This provision underscores the supremacy of constitutional interpretations rendered by the Federal Constitutional Court, ensuring that such interpretations are uniformly applied across all levels of the judiciary and by executive bodies,” it said.

Detailing the facts of the case under consideration, the order said the holding of Karam Ali, the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner, had been determined to be 12691.260 Produce Index Unit (PIU) while land equivalent to 4819 PIU “was in excess and was subsequently resumed from his holding in village Karak Muhammada”.

The order added that the petitioner had filed multiple appeals against this decision, and the matter was eventually settled by the Supreme Court in 1986. The SC had rejected Karam Ali’s appeal in its decision back then.

“It is undisputed that the Supreme Court conclusively decided the matter by its order […], and the issue has attained finality. This finality cannot be disturbed or re-adjudicated by any subordinate authority after the lapse of 24 years,” the order read.

Yet, Karam Ali’s son, Riaz Hussain, “by completely concealing the earlier round of litigation”, filed a revision petition with Federal Land Commission in 2010, the order stated.

The FCC bench noted that this “revision petition was accepted by the Federal Land Commission chairperson in Islamabad in clear violation of Article 189 of the Constitution”.

“Since the matter has already been finalised by the Supreme Court, it could not be reopened for adjudication by any lower forum,” the bench observed.

It further stated: “In the present case, the failure of the chairman of the Federal Land Commission to recognise the binding nature of the Supreme Court’s decision […] constitutes a clear violation of Article 189.

“The acceptance of Karam Ali’s revision petition, without disclosing the prior litigation, not only undermines the finality of the Supreme Court’s ruling but also sets a dangerous precedent that could invite further attempts to circumvent established legal principles.”

The order said the actions of the Federal Land Commission chairperson also contravened constitutional mandates outlined in Article 190 and the principle of res judicata, which “dictates that once a matter has been conclusively adjudicated by a competent court, it should not be reopened or relitigated”.

from Dawn - Home https://ift.tt/eDkhlCF