Judicial Activism in Pakistan: A Comparative Study of CJP Saqib Nisar and Umar Ata Bandial

This paper provides a detailed discussion of judicial activism in Pakistan, comparing the eras of two vastly different Chief Justices, Saqib Nisar and Umar Ata Bandial. This paper explores the core and contentious issues of activism on the court, the gains and pains of judicial activism, the impacts of activism on rights and freedoms, the impacts of activism on the executive, and the impacts of activism on social justice. Through discussion of the Mukhtar Mai and Blasphemy cases in the context of the cases, the study focuses on the additive role of the judiciary in common legal and social questions. In addition, the paper addresses the problems of caseload, public perception challenges, and security issues affecting the judiciary. For this reason, international views are incorporated to situate Pakistan’s judicial processes. Moreover, the paper compares the aggressive behaviour during the tenure of Chief Justice Nisar to the passive stance of the present Chief Justice Bandial and how they caused either favourable or unfavourable shifts in legal norms and society. Finally, the study provides specific suggestions for judicial reforms in the scenarios of case management, access to justice, and cooperation with international organizations in order to strengthen the judiciary as a result of Pakistan’s developing legal structure.