- Relevant constitutional provisions
- Composition and seat
- Qualifications for appointment
- Appointment procedure and the Judicial Commission
- Oath, tenure and retirement
- Acting Chief Justice, acting judges and ad-hoc judges
- Removal of judges
- Original jurisdiction (Article 184)
- Appellate jurisdiction (Article 185)
- Advisory jurisdiction (Article 186)
- Other powers and functions
- Past exam questions and answers
1. Relevant constitutional provisions
The Supreme Court of Pakistan is established and regulated by Articles 175A and 176 to 191 of the Constitution of 1973. Article 175A, inserted by the 18th Constitutional Amendment 2010, introduced the Judicial Commission of Pakistan and fundamentally reformed the process for appointing judges of the superior courts. Articles 176 to 191 deal with the composition, jurisdiction, and functioning of the Supreme Court itself.
2. Composition and seat
The Supreme Court consists of a Chief Justice of Pakistan and sixteen permanent judges. In addition, ad-hoc judges may be appointed when circumstances require. The principal seat of the Supreme Court is in Islamabad. Branch Registries operate in the provincial capitals of Lahore, Peshawar, Quetta, and Karachi, allowing litigants across the country to access the court without travelling to the capital.
All decisions of the Supreme Court are binding on all courts in Pakistan. This binding effect is the legal expression of the Supreme Court’s position at the apex of the judicial hierarchy.
3. Qualifications for appointment
A person may be appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court if they are a citizen of Pakistan and satisfy one of two experience requirements. They must either have served as a judge of a High Court for a minimum of five years, or have been an advocate of a High Court for at least fifteen years. These thresholds ensure that only persons with substantial legal experience at the highest levels of the profession are elevated to the apex court.
4. Appointment procedure and the Judicial Commission
Before the 18th Amendment, the President appointed Supreme Court judges on the advice of the Chief Justice, with little institutional structure around the process. Article 175A changed this completely by creating the Judicial Commission of Pakistan as a permanent constitutional body responsible for nominating judges of the superior courts.
For the appointment of Supreme Court judges, the Judicial Commission consists of the Chief Justice of Pakistan as Chairman, the four most senior judges of the Supreme Court, one former judge of the Supreme Court, the Federal Minister for Law, the Attorney General for Pakistan, and a senior advocate nominated by the Pakistan Bar Council.
The Commission nominates a candidate for each vacancy. That nomination is then sent to a Parliamentary Committee consisting of eight members, four from the National Assembly and four from the Senate, with equal representation from the treasury and opposition benches. The Parliamentary Committee may confirm the nomination or return it to the Commission with reasons within fourteen days. If the Commission sends the same name again, the Committee is bound to confirm it. The confirmed nominee is then appointed by the President.
5. Oath, tenure and retirement
Before entering office, the Chief Justice of Pakistan takes the oath of office before the President of Pakistan. Every other judge of the Supreme Court takes the oath before the Chief Justice. The oath commits the judge to faithfully performing the duties of office and to preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution.
A judge of the Supreme Court holds office until the age of sixty-five years, at which point retirement is mandatory. There is no fixed term of office. A judge continues to serve as long as they remain below the retirement age and are not removed through the constitutional process.
6. Acting Chief Justice, acting judges and ad-hoc judges
When the office of Chief Justice is vacant or the Chief Justice is absent or unable to perform the functions of the office, the President appoints the most senior judge of the Supreme Court to act as Chief Justice. This ensures continuity of leadership at the apex court at all times.
When the office of a judge falls vacant and the remaining strength of the court is insufficient, the President may appoint a judge of a High Court who is qualified for appointment as a Supreme Court judge to serve as an acting judge. An ad-hoc judge is different. The Chief Justice may request the President, in consultation with the Judicial Commission, to appoint additional judges temporarily when the workload of the court so requires. An ad-hoc judge has the same powers and jurisdiction as a permanent judge of the Supreme Court for the duration of their appointment.
7. Removal of judges
A judge of the Supreme Court may be removed from office on two grounds: incapacity to perform the duties of office, or misconduct. The matter is referred to the Supreme Judicial Council, which conducts an inquiry. After examining the matter, the Council reports its findings to the President. If the Council is of the opinion that the judge should be removed, the President acts on that opinion and removes the judge from office. This process protects judicial independence by ensuring that removal cannot happen through executive decision alone.
8. Original jurisdiction (Article 184)
Original jurisdiction means the power to hear a case directly, without it first being decided by a lower court. The Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction under Article 184 operates in two distinct situations.
The first is the resolution of disputes between governments. The Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over any dispute between the federal government and a provincial government, or between two or more provincial governments. No other court may entertain such a dispute. In exercising this jurisdiction, the Supreme Court may pronounce a declaratory judgment stating the legal position, but it does not issue coercive orders against governments in the same way that it might in other proceedings.
The second is the enforcement of fundamental rights in matters of public importance. Under Article 184(3), the Supreme Court may take up any matter involving a question of public importance with reference to the enforcement of fundamental rights. This is the constitutional basis for the suo motu jurisdiction that the court has exercised in a wide range of cases affecting the general public.
Article 184(3) — Constitution of Pakistan 1973“Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 199, the Supreme Court shall, if it considers that a question of public importance with reference to the enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights conferred by Chapter 1 of Part II is involved, have the power to make an order of the nature mentioned in the said Article.”
9. Appellate jurisdiction (Article 185)
The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court allows it to hear appeals against judgments, decrees, orders, and sentences of a High Court. Not every High Court decision is automatically appealable to the Supreme Court. An appeal lies as of right when the High Court has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal in a criminal case and sentenced the accused to death or imprisonment for life. In other cases, an appeal requires a certificate from the High Court that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution, or that the case is otherwise fit for appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court also has the power under Article 185(3) to grant leave to appeal in any case where it considers that the matter involves a substantial question of law of public importance. This discretionary leave jurisdiction allows the court to select cases of genuine constitutional or legal significance rather than functioning as a general court of second appeal.
10. Advisory jurisdiction (Article 186)
Under Article 186, the President of Pakistan may refer any question of law of public importance to the Supreme Court for its opinion. This is a consultative function. The Supreme Court considers the question and reports its opinion to the President. The President is not legally bound to act on that opinion. The advisory jurisdiction allows the executive to seek authoritative legal guidance on difficult constitutional questions without having to wait for litigation to bring the matter before the court.
Exam point: Advisory jurisdiction is exercised only on a presidential reference. The Supreme Court’s opinion is advisory, not binding on the President. No lis or dispute between parties is required.
11. Other powers and functions
Beyond its three primary jurisdictions, the Supreme Court exercises several other important powers. Under Article 186A, it may transfer any case, appeal, or proceeding pending before one High Court to another High Court. Under Article 187, it may issue any directions necessary for doing complete justice in any case or matter pending before it. This power to issue directions for complete justice is broad and has been used by the court to enforce its orders against public authorities.
Under Article 188, the Supreme Court has the power to review any judgment or order made by it. This review jurisdiction allows the court to correct its own errors, though it is exercised sparingly and only on recognised grounds such as an error apparent on the face of the record. The court also has the power to make rules regulating its own practice and procedure, ensuring institutional autonomy over how it manages its own business.
The Supreme Court is the guardian of the Constitution. As the final interpreter of the constitutional text, every other court, tribunal, and authority in Pakistan is bound by its decisions on constitutional questions. This position at the apex of the legal order makes the Supreme Court the ultimate protector of fundamental rights and the rule of law.
