Judging democracy in Pakistan: Conflict between the executive and judiciary
Mohammad Waseem
Abstract
Mohammad Waseem
Abstract
This article deals with the judicialization of politics in Pakistan under the Supreme Court Chief Justice Choudhry (2009–). Confrontation between the executive and judiciary under him led to speculation about the imminent collapse of the democratic system, given the history of military take-over in the country. The use of judicial review, whereby the Court exercised the power of interpreting the Constitution with impunity, was widely criticized as an attempt to encroach on the territory of the legislature through case law. At the institutional level, the Court sought to exercise veto power over the appointment of judges and to deny the right of oversight to any government agency. The Court's pursuit of public interest litigation through frequent suo motu actions taken in a populist mode led to brinkmanship on the part of the executive and judiciary. Despite this power play, the Court's operations fell into the category of modus operandi, instead of being a fight to the finish. However, the Court's pursuit of judicial reform relating to cheap and speedy justice and accountability of the higher judiciary remained far from satisfactory.
OpenAlex reports 26 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This article deals with the judicialization of politics in Pakistan under the Supreme Court Chief Justice Choudhry (2009–). Confrontation between the executive and judiciary under him led to speculation about the imminent collapse of the democratic system, given the history of military take-over in the country. The use of judicial review, whereby the Court exercised the power of interpreting the Constitution with impunity, was widely criticized as an attempt to encroach on the territory of the legislature through case law. At the institutional level, the Court sought to exercise veto power over the appointment of judges and to deny the right of oversight to any government agency. The Court's pursuit of public interest litigation through frequent suo motu actions taken in a populist mode led to brinkmanship on the part of the executive and judiciary. Despite this power play, the Court's operations fell into the category of modus operandi, instead of being a fight to the finish. However, the Court's pursuit of judicial reform relating to cheap and speedy justice and accountability of the higher judiciary remained far from satisfactory.
Key concepts: Democracy, Political science, Executive summary, Executive power, Development economics, Political economy, Sociology, Law