0
Posted August 11, 2013 by advocateguru in Articles
 
 

Judiciary Is An Independent Institution?

In every country, there are three organs which run the affairs of the country and maintain

peace and order in the country. These three organs are legislature, executive and judiciary.

Legislature make laws, executive enforces and judiciary interprets the law. Judiciary plays a very

important role in the interpretation of statutes and laws. Judiciary has played a pivotal role in

the development of law. It develops law by giving judgments which later become a precedent

which is a source of law.

In many countries, the judicial system is very weak and not acts as an independent institution.

The reason behind it is the political system, the governmental structure, feudalism, economic

and social stability and most important the Thana System (Police Station). Countries where

the governmental system is quasi-parliamentary and quasi-presidential, the judiciary are not

independent institution. Where the one governmental system prevails whether parliamentary

or presidential the judiciary is independent institution, like in USA and UK.

In USA, there is a presidential system president has immunity but he cannot interfere in the

matters of judiciary. So, there the judiciary is totally independent. In UK, there is parliamentary

system so the judiciary is not w3holly independent institution but we can say it is independent.

In most of the Asian countries, the judiciary is not independent. Like in Pakistan, the judiciary

is not an independent institution and striving for the independence of judiciary for last many

years. In developing countries, the judiciary is to some extent independent but not properly. It

is influenced by the political system prevails in those countries.

In Pakistan, the judiciary has strong influenced of politicians, landlords, governments, media

and business man. The land mark case in the history of Pakistan is “Maulvi Tamiz-ud-Din

Vs Federation of Pakistan (1955)”. In this case, Maulvi Tamiz-ud-Din filed a writ of Quo-

warranto and mandamus against the Government Because the Governor General dismissed his

constituent Assembly and the Sind High court gave the decision in favor of Maulvi Tamiz-ud-Din

but later on, when the Government did appeal the Court gave decision in favor of Federation

of Pakistan. First time the “Keelson Theory” was introduced in Pakistan in this case and Justice

Munir took the plea that it is the “Law of Necessity” and gave decision in favor of Federation of

Pakistan.

So, in Pakistan the judiciary is never be an independent institution. In 3

judiciary is restored when the Chief Justice of Supreme Court is restored. Now after that to

some extent the judiciary of Pakistan is little bit independent but still it needs more time and

struggle to be free and work as an independent institution from governmental and political

pressure.

Recently, the Supreme Court of Pakistan take a bold step in Swiss cases and dismissed the

Prime Minister for court of contempt but very next case the judiciary step back when the son

of Chief Justice is involved, he didn’t take a bold step because his son is involved in this case

and gave a biased decision in favor of his son. So, it takes a time to become an independent

institution.


advocateguru