Three FCC judgements that reveal quite a lot about what the court appears to stand for

In the past week, the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) delivered three significant rulings that shed light on its perceived priorities. The first case involved an election dispute that had been ongoing for two years. The JUI-F had contested the nomination of a female candidate named Sadaf Ihsan, claiming that the woman named on the party's list - Sadaf Yasmin - and Ihsan were the same person.

However, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had re-nominated Ihsan and the JUI-F subsequently appealed to the FCC. The FCC dismissed the appeal, and Ihsan was confirmed as a JUI-F Member of National Assembly (MNA). This case highlights the FCC's focus on resolving election-related disputes.

The second case concerned the Peshawar High Court (PHC)'s jurisdiction over matters related to the custody or arrest of PTI workers. The FCC intervened after the PHC issued an interim order preventing the hearing of cases related to PTI members. The FCC argued that with martial law in place, the court could no longer entertain such matters under Article 199. This decision limits the PHC's authority to handle fundamental rights issues, impacting women's rights and political party rights.

Lastly, the FCC's third decision appears to restrict the definition of workplace harassment. The court now interprets harassment as limited to overtly sexual actions, disregarding past precedents that considered gender-based discrimination as well. This interpretation, while criticized, may impact women lawyers and their cases, especially those that occurred before a recent amendment to the law.

Overall, these FCC rulings underscore the court's apparent emphasis on election disputes, PTI-related matters, and a narrower interpretation of workplace harassment.