Basic Structure Theory – The Case of Pakistan |
The debate over the “Basic Structure” of the Constitution of Pakistan resurfaces after every major constitutional amendment. The theory suggests that certain core features of a constitution cannot be altered. However, unlike India, Pakistan does not recognize any Basic Structure Doctrine. The Supreme Court has consistently held that Parliament possesses plenary authority to amend the Constitution under Articles 238 and 239, and that courts are barred from striking down constitutional amendments. Pakistan’s Constitution is viewed as a living document, designed to evolve with societal needs.
The discussion began with attempts to treat the Objectives Resolution as a “grundnorm” in cases such as Asma Jillani and State v. Zia-ur-Rahman, but the Supreme Court repeatedly refused to give it superiority over the Constitution. Although the Resolution was later inserted as Article 2A, the Court—most notably in Hakim Khan—reaffirmed that it cannot invalidate other constitutional provisions. Judicial consensus remains that constitutional amendment is exclusively parliament’s function, while courts are confined to ensuring legality in ordinary legislation and executive actions – the power of Judicial Review.
In Al-Jehad Trust and related cases, the Supreme Court........