In a significant ruling, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has declared Section 7 of the Finance Act 2015 null and void, citing its inconsistency with the Constitution of Pakistan. The decision, issued by Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir, marks a major legal development, rendering all actions and notifications under this provision invalid.
This ruling raises critical questions about the scope of parliamentary powers, the supremacy of the Constitution, and the legal validity of past decisions made under this law. Let’s explore the details of this case and its broader implications.
Why Did the Court Declare Section 7 Unconstitutional?
The controversy began when a petition was filed challenging an amendment to the Auditor General Ordinance 2001, introduced through the Finance Act 2015. The petitioners argued that this amendment violated constitutional principles and bypassed the proper legislative process.
After reviewing the case, the Islamabad High Court ruled that Section 7 was unconstitutional, declaring:
The Constitution is the supreme law of Pakistan – All laws must derive their legitimacy from the Constitution.
If a law exceeds its jurisdiction or conflicts with the Constitution, it becomes ultra vires (beyond legal authority).
Bypassing proper legislative procedures can render laws and bylaws invalid.
The court emphasized that laws must be logical, clear, and aligned with the Constitution to remain enforceable. Since Section 7 failed to meet these criteria, it was struck down.
The Legal Impact of This Ruling
By nullifying Section 7, the Islamabad High Court has effectively overturned all decisions, orders, and notifications issued under this law. This decision has significant consequences for governance, finance, and legal policymaking in Pakistan.
Key Takeaways from the Court’s Decision:
Parliamentary powers are limited by the Constitution – Any law conflicting with constitutional provisions can be challenged and overturned.
Bylaws can be struck down – If regulations violate legal procedures, they become unenforceable.
Laws must be clear and reasonable – If a law is vague, unclear, or illogical, the courts can invalidate it.
The ruling also reaffirms that Parliament cannot amend laws arbitrarily without following proper constitutional procedures. This strengthens judicial oversight over legislative actions.
What Happens Next?
The government now has limited options following this decision:
Appeal the Verdict – The state can challenge the ruling in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, seeking a review.
Introduce a New Amendment – If Parliament wishes to restore elements of Section 7, it must reintroduce the law through proper legislative channels.
Compliance with the Decision – Government institutions may need to reverse past actions taken under the now-nullified section.
Potential Challenges & Controversies
While the court’s decision strengthens constitutional supremacy, it also presents some challenges:
Uncertainty Over Past Actions – Since all orders under Section 7 are now void, affected parties may face legal and financial uncertainty.
Political & Economic Implications – The government may need to rework financial policies that depended on the invalidated law.
Possible Supreme Court Review – If appealed, the Supreme Court’s verdict could either uphold or overturn the IHC’s ruling, adding further complexity.
The Islamabad High Court’s ruling on Section 7 of the Finance Act 2015 is a major development in Pakistan’s legal and financial landscape. It underscores the supremacy of the Constitution and reinforces the principle that laws must be clear, logical, and within constitutional limits.
As the government weighs its next steps, this decision sets a precedent for future legal challenges against unconstitutional amendments. Whether this ruling leads to broader legislative reforms remains to be seen, but one thing is clear – constitutional integrity remains at the core of Pakistan’s legal framework.
