13 out of 17 judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the Supreme Court has intrinsic powers to review the constitutionality of a constitutional amendment. While the “basic structure” doctrine had been argued before the courts since the late 1980s, this is the first time that it has recieved overwhelming judicial recognition. In a 900 page judgement (beating the length of the judgment in Kesavananda Bharti) the majority of judges upheld the constitutionality of the 18th and 21st amendments to the Pakistan constitution. Upholding the constitutionality of an impugned amendment while asserting their right to review has been a fairly common feature of the initial basic structure cases in India as well. Interestingly, the identified salient features include parliamentary democracy and judicial independence, but omit any reference to Islam.
The 18th amendment had laid down a new procedure of judicial appointmens while the 21st amendment was enacted following the Peshawar school massacre to set up a series of military courts to try cases involving terrorism.
With this decision, Pakistan joins Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka and India in recognizing intrinsic limits to amendment powers. Given the history of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the arrogation of veto powers over the constitution has divided opinion. Some critiques can be found here (Babbar Sattar), here (Ejaz Haider). The judgment itself is available here
What happens when a Constitution promises rights, but the systems built around it keep concentrating power? In this episode, LAOT host Arnav Mathur speaks with constitutional scholar Dr...
In this article, the authors examine whether the Indian Space Research Organisation qualifies as an industry under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. They argue that space exploration in India...
The Law and Other Things Blog (LAOT), in collaboration with the Community for the Eradication of Discrimination in Education and Employment (CEDE), is inviting applications for the position of Legal...
India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention but has historically adhered to international human rights principles. However, recent judicial responses, particularly the Supreme Court’s...
In this article, the author explores the scope of the judicial review of Money Bills by questioning the neutrality of the Speaker’s certification of the Money Bills and analysing Justice...
In this piece, the author argues that the deceased deserve a right to dignity and cautions against the dangers of AI-driven digital resurrections, which could reduce the dead to mere commodities. To...