← All samples

Article 184 Redacted

A real Pakistani constitutional filing format, with client details redacted. Generate the same document with your own details in LexPK's Draft Studio.

Draft this with my details → Browse all samples
Sample format · details redacted · not for direct filing

Article 184(3)

In the constitutional framework of Pakistan, the Supreme Court has three distinct jurisdictions; appellate, advisory and original. Article 184(3) sets out the apex court’s original jurisdiction and enables it to assume jurisdiction of matters involving a question of ‘public importance’ with reference to the ‘enforcement of any of the fundamental rights’ of the citizens.

In addition, the provision also allows the Supreme Court to take suo motu notice of matters of public importance relating to human rights.

For many years, the Supreme Court of Pakistan interpreted and applied its original jurisdiction in a restrictive manner. However, as the Supreme Court of India started challenging the rigid boundaries of its own judicial domain of power in the 1970s and 1980s through public litigation cases, Pakistani courts too started taking a more expansive view of the ambit of its powers under Article 184(3). Since then, it has taken the position that the Court, under Article 184(3), may be moved by any party, regardless of whether the petitioner is personally aggrieved by the violation of law in question. In addition, and particularly in recent years, the Supreme Court has exercised its original jurisdiction, suo motu, in the absence of a petition by any interested party.

Constitution Petition No. [REDACTED]/2012, dated [DATE REDACTED]

 The Division Bench of [REDACTED], HCJ and [REDACTED], J. hearing a petition filed under Article 184(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 challenging the legality of operation of jirgas/ panchayats as adjudicatory bodies, held the same to be illegal.

‘Council of elders’ or ‘kangaroo courts’ exist in some tribal areas of Pakistan, particularly in north Khyber Pakhtunkhwa [REDACTED] (KPK [REDACTED]) and in some rural areas of KPK [REDACTED], Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan.

The Court noted perused the research report prepared by petitioner titled “Women, Violence and Jirgas – Consensus and Impunity in Pakistan” and opined that jirgas violate fundamental rights of citizens as they apply their own customary/tribal/feudal procedure in taking decisions. Customarily negligible representation of women b

This is an extract of the full format.

Generate the complete document →