Commentary EditorialGuest ColumnistsBlawgsTreaty ReviewKnow Your RightsBook Review

Laws & Judgments New LawsDraft BillsJudgment Analysis

News & Events InternationalNationalRegional

Updates JudiciaryOmbudspersonLaw OfficersBar AssociationsIn House LawyersLaw FirmsLaw SchoolsAlternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) CentresSpecial Monitoring Unit (SMU)

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Centres

Special Monitoring Unit (SMU)

Law FAQs How To GuideEnglish - Urdu TranslationLegal Terms

English - Urdu Translation

More AdmissionsScholarshipsJobs in LawInterviews

Infotainment Video BlogsArtEntertainmentLifestyle

When the constitution falters

When the constitution falters

There are times when a nation faces a constitutional crisis. Unfortunately, this term has become a synonym for any situation involving conflict, so much so that at times, a judge demanding a higher salary in an agitated voice might be labelled a constitutional crisis. Yet, a crisis is a crisis precisely because it cannot be subsumed under a constitutional norm. It is for this reason that emergency measures often include the suspension of constitutional rights, the centralisation of state power, and the limitation of judicial review.

I argue that while constitutions must acknowledge the inevitability of crises, Pakistan’s emergency framework has repeatedly transformed exceptional powers into instruments of routine governance. Rather than preserving constitutional order, emergency provisions have been invoked to suspend it, entrenching executive dominance.

Constitutions across the world contain emergency provisions, either explicit or implicit. Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution permits the suspension of habeas corpus when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it. Other systems rely on implicit executive authority, premised on the expectation that power will........

© Courting The Law