The buzz around constitutional amendments is creating a stir in the legal landscape.
Amidst whispers of a potential 27th Amendment, the judiciary is abuzz with activity. Preparations are underway to accommodate the proposed Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) within the Federal Shariat Court (FSC) premises, sparking discussions about potential relocations.
A Supreme Court judge recently emphasized that a mere change of building won't diminish their authority. This assertion comes as the FSC, currently operating with only three judges, including the Chief Justice, against a sanctioned strength of eight, might soon find a new home on the third floor of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) building.
The relocation process is already underway, with equipment and office materials being shifted to new locations. Officials describe this move as part of broader administrative realignments.
The Supreme Court itself witnessed a heated exchange during a hearing related to Civil Service Rules. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail addressed the concern that a change of building might impact the court's authority. This sparked a lively debate, with senior counsel Faisal Siddiqui questioning the necessity of the FSC's relocation.
Siddiqui's petition also urged the Supreme Court to declare unconstitutional any proposal or bill that infringes upon the constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and high courts. He sought a restraining order against the federal government, cabinet, parliament, and other state organs, pending a final decision.
The petition emphasizes the inviolable nature of the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction under Article 184(3), arguing that no constitutional amendment or legislation can diminish this jurisdiction. It further asserts that establishing a parallel constitutional court would be unconstitutional, as per Articles 175 to 191.
The legal community is abuzz with these developments, and the debate continues, leaving many questions unanswered.
