Answered by Sobia Fatima Advocate
Judicial activism is a neologism for a broader term i.e. judicial review which in simple terminology is a power vested with the superior courts to adjudicate on the constitutionality of a law, statute, administrative action, constitutional provision or an amendment. The power of judicial review is exercised worldwide by the superior courts as it is a strong legal tool in the hands of the judiciary to make ineffective all extra-constitutional acts and policies of the administrative, executive and legislative authorities. Likewise, the Supreme Court of Pakistan is also exercising this power though more frequently now-a-days to check the arbitrariness of various State actions.
This exercise of judicial review has increased substantially after the restoration of de jure judiciary in 2009. In the present state of affairs in Pakistan the judges of the Supreme Court are often criticized for being over active. Critics say that the Supreme Court is intermeddling in the affairs of the State by travelling beyond its jurisdictional domain thus damaging democratic values. This research paper focuses mainly on the question as to whether judicial activism on the part of the apex court i.e .the Supreme Court of Pakistan is obstructing democratic development or rather improving the role of the executive and legislative authorities while setting a road map for future democratic stability and good governance in Pakistan. No doubt Supreme Court’s decisions are highly complicated and assessing their intricacies is difficult, if not impossible for anyone other than a specialist in the area of law. Therefore, I have tried to be more simple and straightforward by relying on the common sense understanding of Constitution and offering a perspective from which a rational person can judge the nature of Court’s duty and its