locus of power has generally been vested in The courts have sought to claim parliament. not autonomous power (notwithstanding the persistent hopes of Groups 1 and 3, the constitutional interventions of General Zia-ul-Haq, and the court’s attack on executive ‘Islamizing’ ordinances); they have, instead, stressed the preeminence of the legislature (however lacking in it might be). ‘consensus’ In his reading of prevailing trends pertaining to the Objectives Resolution, Dieter Conrad reinforces this conclusion. With respect to divine authority, for instance, Conrad notes that direct recipient of [this] delegated authority is not a monarchical head of state but ‘the … the people’. Of course the degree to which these might take up this mantel is variable ‘people’ (as I have written elsewhere). But, with respect to Pakistan’s jurisprudence, the constitutional principle itself is clear: primacy lies with people’. ‘the As Conrad points out, Pakistan’s Constituent Assembly (1952) took a key decision regarding power of interpretation’ vis-à-vis shari‘a, and decision has ‘the ‘this remained the common basic structure [for every] constitution’ thereafter. power to ‘The … bring all legislation in accordance with injunctions of Islam”, he explains, vested in “the ‘was as the final interpreting authority’. general disposition’ of the state was, thus, parliament ‘The treat Islamic principles as a matter [for] the future’ and entrust their realization to the ‘to ‘to political responsibility of the Whereas Kennedy and Lau see a rising star for legislature’. … Pakistan’s judiciary, in other words, I join Conrad in seeing a judicial record infused ‘Islamic’ with the primacy of This emphasis is fragile. But, constitutionally, it remains parliament. empirically unmistakable. This chapter has traced the extent to which Pakistan arrived at a formula of effective parliamentary pre-eminence in 1956 and, despite two superseding constitutional texts and several more constitutional amendments, this basic formula was refined but not reversed. The
locus of power has generally been vested in parliament. The courts have not sought to claim autonomous power (notwithstanding the persistent hopes of Groups 1 and 3, the constitutional interventions of General Zia-ul-Haq, and the court’s attack on ‘Islamizing’ executive ordinances); they have, instead, stressed the preeminence of the legislature (however lacking in ‘consensus’ it might be). In his reading of prevailing trends pertaining to the Objectives Resolution, Dieter Conrad reinforces this conclusion. With respect to divine authority, for instance, Conrad notes that ‘the direct recipient of [this] delegated authority is not … a monarchical head of state but the people’. Of course the degree to which these ‘people’ might take up this mantel is variable (as I have written elsewhere). But, with respect to Pakistan’s constitutional jurisprudence, the principle itself is clear: primacy lies with ‘the people’. As Conrad points out, Pakistan’s Constituent Assembly (1952) took a key decision regarding ‘the power of interpretation’ vis-à-vis shari‘a, and ‘this decision has remained the common basic structure [for every] constitution’ thereafter. ‘The power to … bring all legislation in accordance with “the injunctions of Islam”, he explains, ‘was vested in parliament as the final interpreting authority’. ‘The general disposition’ of the state was, thus, ‘to treat Islamic principles as a matter [for] the future’ and ‘to entrust their realization to the … political responsibility of the legislature’. Whereas Kennedy and Lau see a rising star for Pakistan’s ‘Islamic’ judiciary, in other words, I join Conrad in seeing a judicial record infused with the primacy of parliament. This emphasis is fragile. But, constitutionally, it remains empirically unmistakable. This chapter has traced the extent to which Pakistan arrived at a formula of effective parliamentary pre-eminence in 1956 and, despite two superseding constitutional texts and several more constitutional amendments, this basic formula was refined but not reversed. The
Nelson%2520%2528AALIMS%2529%25201.docx