POWERS AND JURISDICTIONS OF THE SUPERIOR COURTS: there are three types of courts in Pakistan, namely, constitutional courts,

ordinary courts and special courts. All constitutional courts derive their powers and jurisdiction from the constitution. Ordinary courts are originated and their jurisdictions and powers are defined by ordinary laws. Special courts are established and thei r powers are provided under special laws.

It exercises several powers including original, appellate and advisory jurisdictions. 4.1.1: Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court: Under article 184 of the constitution, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction only in two instances, i.e. to decide intergovernmental disputes and to enforce Fundamental Rights of public importance. According to clause (1) of Article 184, the Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction in all inter-Government disputes, i.e. disputes between two or more Governments. Governments mean the Federal and the Provincial governments. According to clause (3) of article 184, without prejudice to the provisions of article 199,6 the Supreme Court has the power to issue writ for the enforcement of any Fundamental Right of public importance.7 Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court: each province and the Islamabad Capital Territory have a High Court.GilgitBaltistan has the Supreme Appellate Court as the highest court of appeal, andChief Court as its high court.Article 199 of the Constitution empowers the High Courts to issue directions, orders or writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for various other purposes Hierarchy of Courts Competent to Hear Criminal Matters: 1.8 Appeals Appeals against convictions in a trial presided over by a judicial Magistrate (involving an offence for which no Islamic punishment (hadd) is prescribed in the substantive criminal law) are heard by the Sessions Court, whereas an appeal in hudood cases from an order of the Sessions Court lies to the Federal Shariat Court. Decisions of the Federal Shariat Court can be appealed before the Shariat Appellate Bench of the Supreme Court whereas a decision in an ordinary appeal before the Sessions Court can then be appealed before the concerned high court. Similarly, decisions by Sessions Courts and some special courts can be appealed before the High Court. Decisions of high courts can be appealed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Courts in Order of Authority 31

Supreme Court of Pakistan (The apex court competent to hear appeals from High Court decisions) High Court (Highest court at the provincial level) Federal Shariat Court (Hears appeals under laws from judgements/orders of Sessions courts) Hudood Sessions Court (To try offences under the PPC and laws and hear appeals from judgements/orders of the Magistrates) Hudood (To try offences punishable up to three years imprisonment and forty five thousand rupees fine) Courts of the Judicial Magistrates of the First Class Courts of the Judicial Magistrates of the Second Class (To try offences punishable up to one year imprisonment and fifteen thousand rupees fine) Courts of the Judicial Magistrates of the Third Class (To try offences punishable up to one month imprisonment and three thousand rupees fine) 4.1.5: Review Power of the Supreme Court: Under Article 188 the Supreme Court has jurisdiction, subject to any Act of Parliament and any Rules made by the Supreme Court itself, to review its own judgment or order. Thus the review power of the Supreme Court can only be limited either by an Act of Parliament or by Rules to be made by the Supreme Court itself. At present there is neither any Act of Parliament nor any Rules of the Supreme Court in this regard.

Power to Punish for Contempt of Court: Article 204 of the constitution confers a power on the Supreme Court and High Court to punish any person who commits an act of contempt of the court. v When he abuses, interferes with or obstructs the process of the court in any way or disobeys any order of the court; or v He scandalizes the court or otherwise does any thing which tends to bring the court or a judge of the court into hatred, ridicule, or contempt; or v He does any thing which tends to prejudice the determination of a matter pending before the court; or v He does any thing which, by law, constitutes contempt of the court.

POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW :

The situation is different in countries where a written and federal constitution limits the powers of parliament. For instance, in the USA, the Supreme Court can strike down legislation enacted by Congress if it finds the same to be incompatible with the constitution. In Germany, the Constitutional Court is empowered to shoot down not only ordinary laws but also constitutional amendments for being inconsistent with the fundamental character of the constitution. Article 8 of the constitution states Any law, or any custom or usage having the force of law in so far as it is inconsistent with the rights conferred by this Chapter [Chapter 1], shall, to the extent of such inconsistency, be void. the power of judicial review on the judiciary in express terms. The constitution does not state that a high court or the Supreme Court can strike down a law passed by parliament or a provincial assembly. What the constitution confers on the superior judiciary is the power to interpret the constitution. It is from this function of the judiciary that the power of judicial review follows. While interpreting some provisions of the constitution, the courts may find that a particular law is in conflict with those provisions. Since the constitution is the fundamental law of the land, any law which conflicts with it shall be void. The legislature has to amend or repeal it. CONSTITUTION IS SOVERIGN NOT PARLIAMENT: Rather its powers are restricted by some written provisions of the constitution. If these powers are over-stepped, the judiciary can be moved to get the grievances of the aggrieved party redressed. US Supreme Court in Marbury vs. Madison (1803).Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States under Article III of the Constitution. The landmark decision helped define the boundary between the constitutionally separate executive and judicial branches of the American form of government.
The case resulted from a petition to the Supreme Court by William Marbury, who had been appointed by President John Adams as Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia but whose commission was not subsequently delivered. Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to force the new Secretary of State James Madison to deliver the documents. The Court, with John Marshall as Chief Justice, found firstly that Madison's refusal to deliver the commission was both illegal and remediable. IMMUNITY TO THE PRESIDENT : the person at the apex of the whole constitutional system must be given total immunity from criminal proceedings, otherwise the system could not

function. "THE KING CAN DO NO WRONG" principle (BRITISH CONSTITUTIONAL LAW) Section 248(2) of he Pakistani Constitution states: No criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continued against the President or Governor in any Court during his term of office. Government of India Act 1935 immuned Governor General, Provincial Governors and Secretary of State through Article 306 of the said Act. The legalist school contends that the extent of presidential immunity is limited and there is no obstacle to the prime minister writing the letter to the Swiss authorities to revive the cases/claims.