Once again, judicial activism in Pakistan is on historic rise. Nearly more than a dozen of suo moto notices have been taken by honorable chief justice of Pakistan within one and half month that is undoubtedly unprecedented in the history of Supreme Court. This judicial spree has sparked a new debate among legal luminaries and other intellectuals that whether judicial activism is good or bad for a democratic dispensation that promotes the concept of separation of powers. Some people view it negatively while others take it as good omen for ensuring good governance and justice in the country.
The opponents of judicial activism are of opinion that by taking too many suo moto notices virtually on every issue that draws the headline, judiciary interferes in the matters of executive and thereby circumscribe it to work freely. On the other hand, the proponents of the notion believe that the executive itself offers an opportunity to judiciary to intervene in its affairs as it lacks good governance and accountability. If the executive performs its duty honestly and with due diligence, the honorable Supreme Court would feel no need to exercise the power of taking suo moto notices under article 184(3).
Furthermore, it is admitted fact that a state is run through tracheotomy of power i, e the legislature, the executive and judiciary and the powers of each organ are enshrined in the constitution. Therefore, every organ of the state is supposed to work within its specified parameters so that the balance of power may remain intact
Adv Syed Abdul Rasool, Jafarabad.
Published in The Balochistan Point on February 7, 2018