ISLAMABAD:
The Federal Government told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that following the enactment of the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) (Amendment) Act, 2026, conviction appeals and bail issues in NAB cases fall within the jurisdiction of the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), rather than the apex court.
A three-member bench, headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and comprising Justice Musarrat Hilali and Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan, was examining whether appeals and bail applications in NAB cases should be heard by the SC or FCC in light of recent amendments to the Accountability Act.
During the proceedings, the federal government argued that under the amendment to the NAB Act, appeals against High Court judgments in NAB cases, including central appeals and bail issues, should be heard by the FCC. The NAB also endorsed the federal government’s position.
Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman argued that the SC no longer had jurisdiction over NAB cases and appeals against convictions and bail issues would now be heard by the FCC.
“It is not possible for part of a case to be heard by the SC and another part by the FCC,” he argued.
The Attorney General argued that while granting bail remained a judicial function based on review of the record, the forum for hearing appeals in NAB cases had now changed.
He said the right to appeal in NAB cases was a fundamental right and had not been abolished, but simply transferred to the FCC through the latest amendments.
Referring to Article 175F(2) of the Constitution, Usman argued that all cases pending before the SC falling within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court were automatically transferred to the FCC.
He argued that the NAO (Amendment) Act was enacted in March 2026 and specifically provided that its provisions would apply retrospectively from the date of commencement of the original NAB Act.
“Accordingly, all NAB cases are transferred to the FCC as of right,” he argued, adding that the amendment changed the appellate forum.
Judge Mazhar asked whether NAB’s business had actually been transferred to the FCC. The NAB lawyer responded that the files had not yet been transferred. Justice Mazhar then asked whether the SC still retained the power to grant bail in NAB cases.
NAB’s attorney argued that the amendments conferred appellate jurisdiction on the FCC and that it would be inappropriate for bail applications to be heard by one forum while appeals were heard by another.
He argued that bail cases and appeals in NAB cases should be heard by the same court because in many cases courts look at the merits of the case before deciding bail applications.
Representing one of the petitioners, lawyer Ibadur Rehman Lodhi argued that the NAB amendments nowhere specified that bail applications would also be heard by the FCC.
