Islamic Injunctions Presented for Challenging Repugnancy of Laws at Federal Shariat Court of Pakistan An Exploratory Study of Judgments

Abstract

Purpose: The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, explicitly affirms the sovereignty of Allah Almighty over the entire universe. The authority must be exercised by the people of Pakistan as sacred trust within the limits prescribed by Allah. The Federal Shariat Court of Pakistan (FSC) is established to examine and decide whether any law or provision of law is against the injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him). In this respect, the court, either on its own initiative or on the petition of a citizen of Pakistan, Federal Government or a Provincial Government, examines and decides the conformity of any law with the injunction of Islam. The current study examined the shariat petition judgments shared on repository of FSC for exploring what types and provisions of laws have been challenged and who challenged them. It also explored Islamic injunctions presented by the petitioners for considering these laws repugnant to Islam and highlighted what laws have been declared as repugnant or non-repugnant by the court.

Methodology: The current exploratory study conducted a content analysis of reported judgments shared on the FSC repository. The court has shared 863 full-text reported judgments on its website. A search interface is provided for users to find their intended judgments. All reported judgments have indicated petitions such as shariat petition, criminal revision and criminal appeal etc. Only shariat petitions with original jurisdiction were examined to achieve objectives and judgments in appellate and revisional jurisdictions were excluded. The final sample consists of 62 judgments.

Findings: The results show that majority (89%) of the petitions were filed by ordinary citizens. Only 06% of petitions were filed by associations, organizations or foundations through their representatives and only two sou parte notices (03%) were issued. Federal and Provincial governments, legislators and retired judges did not file any petition. The majority of petitions (82%) challenged the laws or ordinances and the remaining 18% challenged rules/regulations, policies, notifications, customs, bylaws and a book. More than half (55%) of the challenged laws were in conformity with Islam. Nearly one-fourth (24%) of the petitions were declared repugnant to Islamic injunctions and 19% were dismissed due to non-maintainability on different grounds. Different reasons were presented by the FSC judgment for dismissal of petitions. These reasons include procedural nature of law, Muslim laws, bylaw, cases already decided, petition challenging a book, finance law, issue already decided and lack of interest by the petitioner. The Islamic injunctions or principle adopted by petitioners to challenge laws have been explored for all the petitions shared and available on FSC repository.

Conclusion: The current study has provided complete list of laws and provisions of laws which have been challenged in the FSC. It has also provided an account for laws or provisions of laws which have been dismissed, declared repugnant or non-repugnant to Islam by the court. A comprehensive account of Islamic principles or injunctions presented by petitioners is narrated against each law. The interest of citizens, organizations and governments in seeking guidance of the court in regard to existing laws is highlighted.