The Constitutional Court has ruled that the Registrar's Office has no authority to declare constitutional petitions inadmissible, holding that only the court can decide whether an application is fit for hearing.
The ruling came in a six-page written judgment on a chamber appeal filed against objections raised by the Registrar's Office.
Only court can decide admissibility
In the judgment authored by Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi, the Constitutional Court held that determining the admissibility of a constitutional petition is exclusively a judicial function and cannot be exercised by the Registrar.
The court said the Registrar's role is administrative in nature and does not extend to making judicial determinations.
According to the judgment, the Registrar's Office may return a petition only if it fails to comply with procedural rules.
However, it cannot reject petitions on the grounds of admissibility or exercise judicial powers under any circumstances.
Delegation of judicial powers unconstitutional
The court observed that the Constitution does not permit judicial powers to be delegated to an administrative officer.
It added that allowing the Registrar to decide the admissibility of petitions would violate the constitutional principle of separation of powers.
The judgment further clarified that the Registrar's Office also lacks the authority to declare any constitutional petition frivolous.
The ruling arose from a constitutional petition filed by Razia Aslam, which the Registrar's Office returned on February 14 after raising objections that it was inadmissible.
Razia Aslam subsequently filed a chamber appeal challenging the Registrar's decision, leading to the Constitutional Court's ruling.
