Constitutional petitions cannot be denied by the registrar as being inadmissible. Constitutional Court of the Federal

The Federal Constitutional Court has decided that only the court may decide whether a constitutional petition is appropriate to be heard, and that a registrar cannot pronounce that a petition is inadmissible or return it for that reason.

Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi made the decision in a six-page written judgment on a chamber appeal that was submitted in response to the registrar’s office’s objections. The court clarified the boundaries of the office’s authority when handling constitutional petitions and characterized the registrar’s function as essentially administrative.

Only administrative or procedural objections may be raised by the registrar’s office, per the ruling. A petition may only be returned if it was not submitted in compliance with the relevant regulations and guidelines.

The registrar’s office cannot, under any circumstances, use judicial powers, the court made plain. It noted that such an exercise of power is unlawful since the Constitution does not allow for the delegation of judicial authority to an administrative officer.

The ruling also declared that it would be against the constitutional concept of separation of powers, which makes a clear distinction between the tasks of administrative offices and the judiciary, to give judicial authority to an administrative official.

Additionally, the Federal Constitutional Court decided that a constitutional petition cannot be deemed frivolous or without substance by the registrar’s office. It stated that the court had sole jurisdiction over such decisions.

The written ruling states that Razia Aslam’s constitutional petition was returned by the registrar’s office on February 14th, following an objection that it was not admissible. After that, the petitioner challenged the ruling in a chamber appeal.

While ruling on the chamber appeal, the court established the more general legal principle that the registrar’s office should only be subject to administrative review in accordance with the applicable procedural rules when it comes to issues pertaining to the admissibility or merits of constitutional petitions.