Federal Constitutional Court Sets 10-Minute Limit for Lawyers’ Arguments

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Constitutional Court has introduced a 10-minute time limit for lawyers to present arguments during hearings, with a stopwatch installed in the courtroom to signal when each advocate's allotted time has expired. The measure is intended to accelerate proceedings and improve the pace at which pending cases are heard and decided.

Chief Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan introduced the timing mechanism as part of an effort to make hearings more focused and efficient. Under the arrangement, lawyers are expected to complete their principal arguments within the allotted period, while the stopwatch provides a visible indication of the remaining time and signals when the limit has been reached.

The chief justice said setting a defined period for arguments could help speed up disposal of cases. The move reflects a broader emphasis on courtroom management at a time when the court is dealing with a substantial caseload and is seeking ways to improve the efficiency of its judicial process.

Official statistics displayed by the court show 23,409 cases pending, while 5,869 cases have been disposed of and 5,723 have been instituted. The figures underline the scale of the workload facing the institution and provide context for measures aimed at reducing delays and preventing individual hearings from consuming excessive court time.

The Federal Constitutional Court is a relatively new institution in Pakistan's judicial structure. It was established in November 2025 through the 27th Constitutional Amendment and formally began performing its constitutional functions on November 13, 2025. Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan took oath as its first chief justice the following day.

Since becoming operational, the court has highlighted case management and the use of modern technology among the areas it considers important for strengthening judicial and administrative performance. The stopwatch system represents a practical courtroom-level change designed to impose greater structure on oral submissions while allowing judges to move through listed cases more quickly.

The measure may also require lawyers appearing before the court to adjust how they prepare and deliver arguments. Advocates will need to identify their strongest legal points, organise submissions more tightly and make effective use of limited speaking time. How the limit is applied in unusually complex cases, or whether additional time may be permitted when judges consider it necessary, was not detailed in the initial announcement.

Attention will now turn to how the new system functions during regular hearings and whether it contributes to faster case disposal without affecting the ability of parties to fully present their legal positions. The court's pending-case statistics will provide one indicator over time of whether tighter argument management, alongside other administrative and technological measures, produces a measurable improvement in case processing.