The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on Wednesday expressed serious reservations over a subsequent Supreme Court bench’s decision to reconsider constitutional questions that had already been decided in an earlier judgment, raising concerns about judicial discipline and institutional propriety.
In an order authored by FCC Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan, the court questioned the approach adopted by a three-member Supreme Court bench in June 2022 concerning the constitutional validity of the Income Support Levy Act, 2013.
“The course adopted in the subsequent order, authored by Justice Munib Akhtar, raises serious concerns regarding judicial discipline, legal norms and institutional propriety, particularly when the earlier determination remained operative and was already the subject of review proceedings,” Justice Aminuddin observed.
The remarks came during proceedings on dozens of review petitions challenging a Supreme Court judgment delivered on December 28, 2021.
The FCC bench, comprising Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan and Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, was examining petitions arising from litigation over the Income Support Levy Act, 2013, and a related Sindh High Court decision issued in 2020.
The original dispute concerned whether the legislation, introduced through the Finance Act, 2013, had been enacted in accordance with the legislative procedures required under the Constitution.
In December 2021, a two-member Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Aminuddin Khan and Justice Qazi Faez Isa refused leave to appeal in the cases.
The judgment, authored by Justice Isa, upheld the finding that the Income Support Levy Act had not acquired the status of valid legislation because the constitutionally prescribed legislative procedure had not been followed.
Justice Isa subsequently became chief justice of Pakistan in 2023, while Justice Aminuddin now heads the Federal Constitutional Court.
Despite the earlier ruling and the fact that review petitions remained pending, a separate three-member Supreme Court bench issued an order on June 21, 2022, granting leave to appeal on substantially similar constitutional questions.
That bench included Justice Munib Akhtar, who authored the subsequent order contemplating reconsideration of the earlier determination.
The FCC chief justice questioned the propriety of reopening issues already decided by another bench while the original judgment remained operative and subject to review proceedings.
His observations highlighted concerns about consistency in judicial decision-making and the procedures through which earlier judgments may be reconsidered.
The matter centres on the relationship between judicial precedent, pending review proceedings and the authority of subsequent benches to examine constitutional questions previously determined by the Supreme Court.