Who is Justice Aminuddin Khan and how will Federal Constitutional Court work?

ISLAMABAD: Following the approval of the 27th Constitutional Amendment by both houses of Parliament, the government has established its first Federal Constitutional Court with Justice Aminuddin Khan appointed as its inaugural chief justice.

Who is Justice Aminuddin Khan?

Before becoming Chief Justice of the Federal Constitutional Court, Justice Aminuddin Khan served as a judge of the Supreme Court for six years and subsequently headed the constitutional bench established under the 26th Constitutional Amendment.

On 12 July 2024, a 7‑5 majority bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled that 39 reserved seats (women and minorities) should be allocated to the Pakistan Tehreek‑e‑Insaf (PTI), despite its candidates having contested as independents and joined the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) later.

Later, Justice Aminuddin Khan as head of the constitutional bench approved review petitions challenging the 7‑5 majority decision and restored the decision of the Peshawar High Court (PHC).

The constitutional bench questioned whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to override the PHC’s decision in the matter and whether Article 185/175 empowered it to intervene.

Prior to his elevation to the Supreme Court, he worked as a judge at the Lahore High Court from 2011 to 2019.

Justice Aminuddin also headed a six-member Supreme Court bench that heard intra-court appeals regarding civilian cases, being tried in military courts, regarding May 9 events.

Hailing from Multan, Justice Aminuddin became a high court lawyer in 1987 and a Supreme Court lawyer in 2001. During his practice, he primarily handled civil cases.

Alongside Justice Aminuddin, notifications have been issued for six other judges to join the Federal Constitutional Court. These include three Supreme Court judges — Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Amir Farooq, and Justice Ali Baqi Najfi — as well as Chief Justice Rozi Khan of the Balochistan High Court, Justice Kareem Khan Agha of the Sindh High Court, and Justice Arshad Hussain Shah of the Peshawar High Court.

How will the Federal Constitutional Court function?

The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) will hear constitutional cases, particularly those involving the state as a party.

The FCC will also hear appeals against decisions of various high courts, including income tax and revenue cases.

Cases related to constitutional matters in the Supreme Court will also be transferred to the newly established court. Additionally, the FCC has the powers to take suo motu notices.

Why was the FCC needed?

Supreme Court Bar Association President Haroon Rashid said that the establishment of the FCC was not only the demand of two major political parties but a majority of legal community also demanded that.

Talking to the BBC, he noted that in the past 18 years, the Supreme Court had prioritised political cases at the cost of ordinary litigants’ cases with a backlog for long periods.

Rashid said that with the establishment of the FCC, ordinary citizens will have faster access to justice in the Supreme Court.

He also accused some judges of pursuing political agendas, causing divisions and disagreements within the judiciary. He stressed that judges should focus on delivering relief to ordinary citizens rather than advancing political interests.

He further criticised past judicial appointments, stating that selections were often based on personal connections or prior association with prominent legal chambers rather than merit. He acknowledged that some lawyers oppose the constitutional amendment and the new court, but said they are a minority.

Supreme Court powers and concerns

Some legal experts believe the 27th Constitutional Amendment has curtailed the powers of the Supreme Court.

Barrister Salahuddin, who specialises in constitutional cases, said consultations with sitting judges before the amendment would have been preferable to address concerns. He said it seems that the Supreme Court’s powers have largely been transferred to the FCC.

Salahuddin noted that protests against the amendment by some bar associations lack intensity unless supported by civil society. He said that the Supreme Court has effectively been reduced to a symbolic role.

Supreme Court retired judge Faisal Arab said that some judges feel the 27th Constitutional Amendment has altered the basic structure of the Constitution, making their continuation in office irrelevant. He said that the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction has been curtailed to the extent that it no longer functions as the country’s apex court but as a regular judicial entity.

Citing Indian example, Justice Arab pointed out that globally, supreme courts often prevent attempts to amend fundamental constitutional structures. He said some judges believe they should resign over the amendment, but resignations will have little immediate impact except to raise their stature in the public eye for resisting the changes.

He said that he did not foresee any major movement against the amendment in coming years.

“Any challenge to the amendment will now be heard exclusively by the FCC,” he said, questioning which judge would hear a case filed against their own court.

‘Attack on Pakistan’s Constitution’

Two senior judges of Supreme Court, Justice Mansoor Ali Khan and Justice Athar Minallah, strongly criticised the 27th Constitutional Amendment, describing it as a “serious attack on the Constitution of Pakistan,” and announced their resignations.

Earlier, both judges had written letters to the Chief Justice of Pakistan expressing their concerns and reservations regarding the amendment.

In their resignation letters, the judges stated that the amendment “subordinates the apex court to the government” and that it “strikes at the spirit of our constitutional democracy.”

In response, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s adviser Rana Sanaullah alleged that “these judges had political and personal agendas and have no mandate to comment on political matters or parliamentary performance.”

Referring to some lines from Justice Mansoor’s resignation, he described it as “political speech and political writing.”

Meanwhile, senior lawyer Makhdoom Ali Khan also resigned from his membership of the Law and Justice Commission. In his resignation letter to the commission chairman, he said, “Improvement is possible through consultation, strategy, and reasoned argument, but without judicial independence, legal reform is impossible.”

He added that the 26th Constitutional Amendment had left young lawyers disillusioned.

The Law and Justice Commission, headed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan, includes the chief justices of all high courts, the Attorney General, the Chief Justice of the Shariah Court, and prominent lawyers from various provinces. The commission advises the government on reforms and legislation and ensures the rule of law at the federal level.

The resignations have drawn strong reactions from the legal community as well.

Lawyer and social activist Iman Mazari wrote that “there is hope for the country in the resignations of Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Athar Minallah. No one can fight against the system from within, but the 26th Amendment has tested it.”

She added, “The people of Pakistan will not silently accept this attack on the Constitution. We will resist, and we must resist.”

PLDAT President Ahmad Mehmood Bilal praised the judges’ decision, saying, “Under the new circumstances, it became impossible for them to act according to their conscience and vision. Both judges were highly intelligent and independent-minded. This is a significant loss for Pakistan’s judiciary.”

Journalist Mubashir Zaidi wrote, “Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Athar Minallah will always be remembered.”

Social activist Jalila Haider said, “When voices of integrity are sidelined, institutions weaken and public trust in justice erodes. Such moments remind us of the urgent need to uphold constitutional values and judicial independence, and to speak the truth despite pressure.”

Lawyer Salahuddin rejected the claim that the judiciary was under attack for the first time, recalling past incidents including Bhutto’s fifth and sixth amendments, Benazir Bhutto’s 1994–1996 tenure, attacks on the Supreme Court by Nawaz Sharif’s supporters in 1997, and Imran Khan’s reference against Qazi Faez Isa. He wrote, “In the past, we disliked the judiciary’s inclination towards GHQ, and now we dislike judges resisting GHQ.”

User Ahsan Khan noted, “Mansoor Ali Shah and Athar Minallah are the two judges who delayed the election decision in 90 days, and today, ironically, they themselves are entangled.”

Another user wrote, “The judiciary is reaping what it sowed.”