Constitutional Law
This domain tests the 1973 Constitution: fundamental rights, writ jurisdiction, federal structure and amendment, and the courts' power of judicial review.
Fundamental rights (Articles 8–28)
Article 8 renders any law inconsistent with fundamental rights void to the extent of inconsistency. Core guarantees include security of person (Art. 9), safeguards on arrest and detention (Art. 10), fair trial (Art. 10A), prohibition of retrospective punishment and double jeopardy (Arts. 12–13), dignity (Art. 14), freedoms of movement, assembly, association, trade, speech and information (Arts. 15–19A), religion (Art. 20), equality (Art. 25), education (Art. 25A), and non-discrimination in public places and employment (Arts. 26–27). Restrictions must be by law and reasonable.
Writ jurisdiction
- Article 199: a High Court may issue habeas corpus, mandamus, certiorari, prohibition and quo warranto against a person or authority within its territorial jurisdiction, where no other adequate remedy is available. Writs do not ordinarily lie against purely private parties.
- Article 184(3): the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction requires both a question of public importance and a reference to enforcement of a fundamental right. It is not a general appellate or grievance channel.
Federalism and amendment
The 18th Amendment devolved subjects and strengthened the Council of Common Interests (Arts. 153–154). Amendments follow Article 239; courts have debated limits on the amending power, but the Constitution's supremacy remains the anchor of review.
Worked example
A provincial executive order bans a party's rally citing law and order. Article 17 protects association and Article 16 assembly. An executive order without statutory authority is void; if a statute exists, the restriction must be reasonable and proportionate to the stated harm. A High Court under Article 199 can quash it; Article 184(3) is unnecessary unless public importance and a fundamental right are both engaged.
Traps
Treating Article 184(3) as available for private disputes; ignoring the alternative-remedy condition under Article 199; assuming fundamental rights bind private individuals absent a public function.