The Supreme Court of Pakistan has issued a detailed written judgment clarifying the jurisdictional framework between the Supreme Court and the newly established Federal Constitutional Court following the 27th Constitutional Amendment.
Read More: Judicial Transfers, Constitutional Design, and Institutional Integrity
The decision, authored by a two-member bench headed by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, explains the distribution of powers between the two courts and how constitutional and regular cases will now be handled separately.
According to the judgment, the Supreme Court and the Federal Constitutional Court are not subordinate to each other and function as parallel courts. The ruling further states that decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court will be binding on other courts in matters of legal principles, ensuring uniform interpretation of constitutional issues across the judicial system.
سپریم کورٹ نے 27 ویں آئینی ترمیم کے بعد دائره اختیار پر فیصلہ جاری کر دیا#SupremeCourt #Constitution #27thAmendment #LegalDecision #Judiciary #CourtRuling #PakistanLaw #BreakingNews #LegalUpdate #Abbtakk
Whatsapp Channel : https://t.co/MkW0CEGqyw… pic.twitter.com/hhJ1EMpaOH— AbbTakk (@AbbTakk) May 6, 2026
The court observed that mixing constitutional and non-constitutional matters can create legal complications. Therefore, such cases should be separated and directed to the appropriate forums. Constitutional matters will fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal Constitutional Court, while regular civil and appellate cases will continue to be heard by the Supreme Court.
Under the ruling, appeals related to constitutional petitions filed under Article 199 will be heard by the Federal Constitutional Court. However, general civil and routine appeals will remain within the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction. The judgment also noted that appeals against High Court decisions involving constitutional questions will be transferred to the Federal Constitutional Court, while certain matters such as tenancy disputes and specific family cases will remain outside its scope.
The Supreme Court also directed that cases previously combined under mixed jurisdiction be de-clubbed and sent to the appropriate forums. Contempt of court matters will continue to be heard by the court whose order was allegedly violated, maintaining judicial accountability.
Read More: Supreme Court questions proposed constitutional court
The judgment emphasizes the principle of judicial comity, stating that both courts must respect each other’s jurisdiction to avoid conflicting decisions and ensure smooth functioning of the constitutional framework.