DefinePK hosts the largest index of Pakistani journals, research articles, news headlines, and videos. It also offers chapter-level book search.
Title: Judicial Activism in Pakistan: A Comparative Study of CJP Saqib Nisar and Umar Ata Bandial
Authors: Haroon Khalid
Journal: The Critical Review of Social Sciences Studies (CRSSS)
| Category | From | To |
|---|---|---|
| Y | 2024-10-01 | 2025-12-31 |
Publisher: Bright Education Research Solutions
Country: Pakistan
Year: 2024
Volume: 2
Issue: 2
Language: English
DOI: 10.59075/gtnm3436
Keywords: PakistanJudicial ActivismChief justiceSuo motoDosso caseSaqib NisarPanama paper case
This paper provides a detailed discussion of judicial activism in Pakistan, comparing the eras of two vastly different Chief Justices, Saqib Nisar and Umar Ata Bandial. This paper explores the core and contentious issues of activism on the court, the gains and pains of judicial activism, the impacts of activism on rights and freedoms, the impacts of activism on the executive, and the impacts of activism on social justice. Through discussion of the Mukhtar Mai and Blasphemy cases in the context of the cases, the study focuses on the additive role of the judiciary in common legal and social questions. In addition, the paper addresses the problems of caseload, public perception challenges, and security issues affecting the judiciary. For this reason, international views are incorporated to situate Pakistan’s judicial processes. Moreover, the paper compares the aggressive behaviour during the tenure of Chief Justice Nisar to the passive stance of the present Chief Justice Bandial and how they caused either favourable or unfavourable shifts in legal norms and society. Finally, the study provides specific suggestions for judicial reforms in the scenarios of case management, access to justice, and cooperation with international organizations in order to strengthen the judiciary as a result of Pakistan’s developing legal structure.
To provide a detailed discussion and comparative analysis of judicial activism in Pakistan, specifically comparing the tenures of Chief Justices Saqib Nisar and Umar Ata Bandial, examining their approaches, impacts, and proposing reforms.
Descriptive analysis research methodology, drawing on legal scholarship, court decisions, scholarly analyses, and specific case studies.
graph TD
A["Literature Review: Legal Scholarship, Court Decisions, Scholarly Analyses"] --> B["Descriptive Analysis of Judicial Activism in Pakistan"];
B --> C["Comparative Analysis: CJP Saqib Nisar vs. CJP Umar Ata Bandial"];
C --> D["Examination of Case Studies and Historical Context"];
D --> E["Identification of Challenges Faced by the Judiciary"];
E --> F["Comparative International Perspectives"];
F --> G["Formulation of Recommendations for Judicial Reforms"];
G --> H["Conclusion and Implications"];
The paper discusses the core issues of judicial activism, its gains and pains, and its impact on rights, freedoms, the executive, and social justice. It contrasts the aggressive behavior of CJ Nisar with the passive stance of CJ Bandial, analyzing how their approaches have caused shifts in legal norms and society. The discussion also touches upon the historical evolution of judicial activism in Pakistan, its pros and cons, and comparative international perspectives.
Chief Justice Saqib Nisar's tenure was characterized by assertive judicial activism, intervening in executive and legislative domains, leading to significant outcomes like the disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, but also raising concerns about overreach. Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial adopted a more restrained approach, emphasizing deference to other branches and adherence to legal frameworks, which is welcomed by proponents of judicial restraint but criticized by some for potentially missing opportunities to address societal issues. The judiciary faces challenges such as case backlog, resource constraints, and public perception issues.
Judicial activism has been instrumental in shaping Pakistan's legal and political landscape, but it presents a complex dilemma. The contrasting legacies of CJ Nisar and CJ Bandial highlight the need for a nuanced approach that balances accountability with restraint. The future of Pakistan's judiciary lies in finding a middle ground where assertive interventions address societal issues without undermining democratic processes, fostering a just and equitable future.
1. Chief Justice Saqib Nisar's tenure was from December 2016 to January 2019. (Confirmed by text)
2. Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial assumed office in February 2022 and served until September 2023. (Confirmed by text)
3. The Panama Papers case in 2017 led to the disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. (Confirmed by text)
Loading PDF...
Loading Statistics...