Mapping Legal Pluralism in Two Asian Jurisdictions: A Comparative Study of Pakistan and Singapore

This article makes a comparative analysis of how Pakistan and Singapore manage to navigate in the legal ambit of pluralism within the dual framework of a centralized, common law-based legal system. Pakistan is a deeply-rooted, socially sedimented pluralism formed by Islamic law, ethnicity and informal justice. In contrast, Singapore controls limited pluralism through a technocratic system and highly centralized legal system. By studying both reforms and law-making, the article brings up institutional and ideological distinctions, ranging from the legal disorganization of Pakistan to the naturalization of legitimacy issues in Singapore. It analyzes how, properly handled, legal pluralism has the potential to promote legal innovation, strengthen state legitimacy and promote inclusivity in governance in postcolonial societies.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
Published
2025-06-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.52131/pjhss.2025.v13i2.2906
Primary Topic
International Arbitration and Investment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Mapping Legal Pluralism in Two Asian Jurisdictions: A Comparative Study of Pakistan and Singapore

M. Abu Bakar Chandia, Muhammad Asim Rafiq, Ali Arshian Jutt, Ali Istafa
Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
International Arbitration and Investment Law
article

Mapping Legal Pluralism in Two Asian Jurisdictions: A Comparative Study of Pakistan and Singapore

M. Abu Bakar Chandia, Muhammad Asim Rafiq, Ali Arshian Jutt, Ali Istafa
article en

Abstract

This article makes a comparative analysis of how Pakistan and Singapore manage to navigate in the legal ambit of pluralism within the dual framework of a centralized, common law-based legal system. Pakistan is a deeply-rooted, socially sedimented pluralism formed by Islamic law, ethnicity and informal justice. In contrast, Singapore controls limited pluralism through a technocratic system and highly centralized legal system. By studying both reforms and law-making, the article brings up institutional and ideological distinctions, ranging from the legal disorganization of Pakistan to the naturalization of legitimacy issues in Singapore. It analyzes how, properly handled, legal pluralism has the potential to promote legal innovation, strengthen state legitimacy and promote inclusivity in governance in postcolonial societies.

Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social SciencesVol. 13(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
International Arbitration and Investment Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.