FCC says it is not bound by Supreme Court rulings

The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) is not bound by the decisions of the Supreme Court but can ask for direction from its judgements, the court declared, defining the legal position of judicial precedents and prescribing tight conditions for filing review petitions.

The Federal Constitutional Court has said in its opinion that Supreme Court judgements are solely of persuasive value for the FCC. The constitutional court, however, may follow a legal precedent set by the Supreme Court, if it is in accordance with law and Constitution.

The court also made it very clear that the scope of review authority is quite narrow and only extends to particular circumstances.

The court held that a review petition might be entertained only if there was an error apparent on the record or an omission which causes a miscarriage of justice. Review petition is not a device to re-argue a case or to get a fresh hearing of the matter.

The court said that in review procedures it does not retry the whole case, but looks to see if there is an obvious error in the record of the initial case.

The FCC also cautioned against routine filing of review petitions, advising litigants and counsel to approach the court for review only when there exist genuine and legally valid grounds.

It cautioned that frivolous or malicious review petitions could entail fees of Rs25,000 or more.

It also said that an Advocate-on-Record who files frivolous or malicious review petitions could also be subjected to disciplinary punishment.

The Advocate-on-Record or the party involved shall be obliged to file a certificate prior to filing a review petition indicating the reasons on why review is sought.

The court further directed to deposit Rs50,000 as security for hearing of a review petition.

In the event of dismissal of a review petition or its declaration frivolous or malicious, the deposited security may be lost, says the Federal Constitutional Court.

The ruling further said review petitions could be handled through distribution without an oral hearing in certain instances.

FCC Clarifies Scope of Right to Appeal

The Federal Constitutional Court also defined the procedure for appeals against decisions of High Courts under Article 199 of the Constitution.

It said that permission from the FCC was necessary under Article 175F(1)(c) prior to initiating an appeal against a High Court judgement issued under Article 199.

The court emphasised that leave to appeal is not an appeal as of right. An application becomes an appeal only once leave has been granted by the court.

It further clarified that the dismissal of a leave-to-appeal motion does not mean that the High Court’s decision has been affirmed.

The court said it did not have to give extensive grounds when refusing an application for leave to appeal.

It noted that a non-speaking ruling or an order without specific rationale does not per se be a foundation for filing review petition.

When the court is at the leave-to-appeal stage it looks at whether there is a legal question worthy of examination or whether intervention is required to prevent a miscarriage of justice.

FCC rejects Balochistan Trading Company’s review petition

The Federal Constitutional Court dismissed a review appeal submitted by Balochistan Trading Company and directed for forfeiture of the security deposited by the company in the meanwhile.

The court found that the firm had not identified any error obvious on the face of the record that would warrant a review of the earlier decision.

The court noticed that the review petition was reiterative of the arguments advanced in the proceedings.

Therefore, the company’s petition for the restoration of its lease and possession was dismissed.