JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE: CASE STUDY OF PAKISTAN

Table of Contents

Introduction        3

Historical evolution of pakistan’s judiciary        4

Hierarchy of judicial system        5

Lower judiciary        6

The court of civil judge cum magistrate        7

Selection and appointments        7

Jurisdiction        8

Security of tenure, accountability, and progression to higher court        8

Additional district and session judges        9

Selection and appointment of additional district and session judges        9

Jurisdiction        9

Security Of Tenure, Accountability, And Progression        10

District And Session Judge And His Role In District Judiciary        11

Higher Judiciary        11

Supreme Court Of Pakistan        11

High Courts        11

Federal Shariat Court        12

Judicial Appointments And Security Of Tenure Of High Courts Judges        13

Judicial Appointment Commission        14

Procedure For Selection Of Judges Of Higher Judiciary        14

Procedure For Removal        16

Summary        17

References:        17

Introduction

Three times since the opportunity presented itself, when the military toppled much of Pakistan's rule, the presidential branch not only failed to end the otherworldly power-sharing, but it also supported a coalition that came to power illegally. The Musharraf administration extended law and order to community groups, ensured the dominance of power over the rule of law, and weakened democratic foundations. It is normal that key changes in the governance structure in regards to unification, promotion and dismissal of judges, as in the case of regular courts, will restore confidence in the judiciary. However, legitimate independence from political influence and abuse cannot be restored through specific authoritative remedies. Progress depends on the sincere commitment of government experts to comply with law and order, as well as changes in regulations. Since 1955, Pakistani courts have played an important political role in confirming the reality of differences in government.^[1] To solve possible legitimate problems, the current military government, like previous ones, has developed ways to eliminate the shortcomings of the legal framework. The boss practices grooming advice using legal systems, guidelines, and deviations to ensure that his employees comply with basic conditions.  Soon after the riots in October 1999, the presidency was pacified by judges who could challenge the illegal use of power for military purposes. The purge was bolstered by a proposal for judges to take a solemn oath of allegiance to President Musharraf's Interim Constitutional Order - a responsibility that prompted the judges to challenge the guarantees they had recently requested to fulfill under the 1973 Constitution. Fears that a different warranty will be used to eliminate additional benefits currently limit the site's capabilities. Moreover, the newly appointed authorities should be careful, because the manager can remove them for two or three years, refusing to "confirm" their agreements.

Historical evolution of pakistan’s judiciary

Since much of the law is borrowed from the British pioneer system, it is considered by many to be unreliable.^[2] In addition, there is pressure between the established legal framework based on precedent and Islamic law dependent on the Qur'an, especially in remote areas and areas. Requests for authenticity are exacerbated by low competence, prevalence of deferrals, unconventional legal preparation, desecration and the understanding that the judicial structure is a means of adjourning justice controlled by the wealthy or potentially incredible interests of political partners currently in key legal positions. for example, the President of the High Court. ships Lahore and SindhThe central judges of large courts have significant administrative authority over the referral of cases to judges and the responsibility of judges in the courts in this area. The right of the leader, with the help of some of the chief justices, to refer the case to subordinate authorized bodies undermines the assumptions of lawyers and defendants about a reasonable interim order when the chairman is in session.^[3] In addition, the leader has inappropriate influence over the constitutional cycle through some of the chief justices in light of the fact that the latter select returning officials to make decisions from the position of a subordinate bailiff.

Undermined by this political deception, the best judicial executive can do nothing but engage in illegal defamation of money within its own positions. The incapacitation of the current bailiff also hinders the change of lower bailiff, including in the courts in which many standard court cases are pending. A huge asset shortage and the inevitable difficulties of a subordinate judiciary lead to painful delays in the least complex cases and undermine public confidence in the judiciary and the rule of law.  ^[4] The general courts, creating an equivalent executive branch. Since August 1947, the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and the Northern Territories have shared sui generis codes of law, largely independent of Pakistan's overall legal leader. Even government agencies seem to feel that innovation systems in these areas are virtually unprotected. In addition, separately in 1997 and 1999, government agencies created a discrete enemy in the form of illegal courts of intimidation and responsibility. These courts have simple procedural capacities that make them too attractive for energetic police officers and prosecutors. In the absence of an administration clearly committed to upholding sacred guidelines and legal laws, judges will continue to feel insecure and in most cases will make decisions by eye of the government plan.

Hierarchy of judicial system

Pakistan's legal framework is a tiered structure with two classes of courts: an unprecedented (or higher) bailiff and a subordinate (or lower) bailiff. Pakistan's Supreme Court, Federal Shariat Court and five high courts, most notably the Supreme Court, are looking for an unprecedented senior lawyer. Each of the four districts has a High Court, as well as a High Court in the Islamabad metropolitan area. The Pakistani constitution places more responsibility on the executive than on upholding and protecting the constitution. Neither the Supreme Court nor the High Court can rehearse an area related to ancestral regions other than those indicated.^[5] The disputed regions of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan have separate legal entities. Apart from the Supreme Court of Pakistan, there are regions that are not yet consecrated destinations in Pakistan. These are GilgitBaltistan and AJK. According to Pakistan's constitution, these two regions are not part of Pakistan, but over time are represented by the Pakistani government. However, Gilgit Baltistan declared its freedom from Dogra / Maharaja of Kashmir on November 1, 1948, which should be the day of Gilgit Baltistan's autonomy. Likewise, the strength of the Pakistani Constitution is not preserved, but through presidential mandates and prime minister's packages, they are governed and given a break from powers appointed by the federal government of Pakistan. Thus, another type of APEX court was presented in GilgitBaltistan, called the GilgitBaltistan Supreme Court of Appeal, with designated forces such as the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

Lower judiciary

Territorial chief or circuit courts exist in each region of each province and have general and criminal chambers, usually falling under the 1908 Code of Civil Procedure for general cases and the Code of Criminal Procedure for criminal cases. The local bailiff is the chief executive officer of the District Judge and Assembly Judge. Each regional base camp has different courts located outside the region and there are judges with the same legal force as the district court and assembly judge, including preliminary for the offenses listed in Plan II of the Criminal Procedure Code as the only ones.^[6] eg Cuttle and Amd (guilty manslaughter), assault, criticism, etc. These courts additionally hear cases under Pakistani Hoodood laws, some offenses under the Narcotics Law, etc. by police authorities. In general jurisdiction, these courts hear cases under the Succession Act, the Insolvency Act, lawsuits against the government, a summary of the instruments of the dispute, etc. These courts additionally serve as courts for reviewing and revising the criminal assessment. General and family appeals and civil revisions of decisions and orders of the courts of high general arbitrators, general appointed bodies, rental regulators and family courts are filed with the local court, which also makes a similar decision in the additional territory. All feelings provided by judges and feelings provided over four years by collegiate courts, judges or officials, especially those who participate in 30 Cr.P.C. region. can be appealed to the Assembly Court, which also transmits complaints and amendments in criminal matters to arbitrators.^[7]

The court of civil judge cum magistrate

Each city has different courts of general jurisdiction and courts. Usually, within the framework of judicial justice, these courts have the right to consider all violations, except for those that are clearly an offense recognised by the Session Court, but the time limit for a final decision does not exceed three years. Be that as it may, a lawyer with special powers, in accordance with article 30 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, can apply all disciplines except the death penalty. ^[8]Typically, in the Sindh and Balochistan regions, these courts act as the general arbiter in second class cases with a monetary limit of up to Rs 50,000. General Purpose Bodies have chambers in different regions to deal with first and lower degree claims.^[9]

Selection and appointments

Prior to the adoption of the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution, the Supreme Court of Pakistan case was referred to the President of Pakistan on the proposal of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. This system reproduces different inclinations. A significant proportion of the appointed judges were relatives of various appointed authorities or state bodies. However, following the selection by the Supreme Court in the Al-Jehad Trust case, the legitimacy of state power was limited. Under the terms of this announcement, the government and the office of the President will undoubtedly follow the proposal of the Chief Justice of Pakistan. Following the entry into force of the eighteenth and nineteenth amendments to the Constitution, another Legal Commission (the alleged Judicial Commission of Pakistan) and a parliamentary advisory group were established to exchange views. The Pakistan Judicial Commission consists of nine members: the Chief Justice of Pakistan, four senior officials of the Supreme Court, a former Chief Justice or a Supreme Court Justice, elected by the current Chief Justice at a meeting with four persons. the previously mentioned Supreme Court justices, the Attorney General of Pakistan, the Federal Minister of Law and Justice, and one high-ranking ally delegated by the Pakistan Bar Council. The Parliamentary Committee supports or cannot approve a candidate for the Judicial Commission. All the power of the head is limited by the legal commission, and the president has no additional powers except to help competitors. The chief overseer has only ministerial authority over the association procedure.^[10]

Jurisdiction

Typically, these courts hear cases under the Inheritance Law, Insolvency Law, lawsuits against the government, adjudication of claims concerning controversial instruments, etc. These courts are also active courts for the investigation and review of criminal cases. General and family proposals and general amendments to court elections and orders from prominent general mediators, delegated professionals, rental supervisors and family courts are documented in the district court, which also does something almost identical to the selection of support staff region. The West Pakistan Family Courts Act 1964 regulates the jurisdiction of the family courts. According to the plan of the 1964 Act, family courts are involved in disputes over divorce, restoration of maintenance of spouses and minors, dowry, dowry, questions about gatekeepers and wards, that is, custody of minors, restoration of a wedding gift, etc., under vigilant supervision of the district court, and in the intervals between the established deadlines, court decisions are not subject to appeal, but are considered under the supervision of a higher court in the specified place.^[11]

Security of tenure, accountability, and progression to higher court

Judicial officers are also appointed by the ordinary high courts on the proposal of the ordinary public aid commissions. These commissions annually conduct open soulless tests that are published in state newspapers. The basic skills required are a Bachelor of Laws degree from any future school and two years as an advertiser in that ward. The tests include various required entries. For example, the Punjab Civil Service Commission creates the necessary archives in English, as well as exhibits, Urdu and articles, Islamic exams, Pakistani investigations, general information (target test), criminal law, common law 1 and 2, and case law.^[12] All certified participants undergo psychological testing. Those who have gone through both of these stages meet with the delegates of the relief commissions, and recommendations for finalizing the agreements are referred to the individual High Courts. In Sindh, all exercises are directed against the testing scene by the National Testing Authority (NTS), which is mainly based on English and general data. Candidates who try to somehow pass a test score then take another NTS test, after which promising ordinary people are selected to meet under the chairmanship of five senior high court justices, including the president. The judge and newcomers who figure out how to get through the meeting are proposed for the position of Chief Arbiter and Judge, who are appointed from this point on by the Pakistani government body.

Additional district and session judges

Selection and appointment of additional district and session judges

The Judicial Committee of the High Court decides on the promotion of judges. When appointed as an additional district and session judge, the proportion of administrative staff is recorded on a par with recruitment from the bar. District and session judges are appointed gradually, depending on the status and wealth of existing legal entities. Once agreed, the general appointing bodies, including the magistrate of justice, undergo special training at the Federal Judicial Academy and, in addition, receive a separate general legal framework. Such training includes training in various relevant / procedural laws, the judiciary, case management, legal methods and codes of practice, etc. As mentioned earlier, the High Courts oversee and direct the work of the lower courts. This supervision and control is both managerial and legal in nature. Within the legal framework, the High Court can initiate disciplinary proceedings against an official. Legal oversight is also carried out by amending and documenting proposals to the High Court that contradict the rulings / decisions of the lower courts.^[13]

Jurisdiction

Neighborhood Courts in Pakistan are courts that operate at the territorial level and are limited to higher courts. District courts exist in every region and in every region with a general and criminal chamber. Each headquarters has several additional zones and judges who are primarily responsible for the courts. Adjacent judges and the assembly of appointed authorities have basic and legal powers throughout the territory under their jurisdiction. ^[14]Likewise, the general court is the primary court for real crimes such as murder, assault (zina), harab (theft of equipment, including cash and gold), and abstract court for standard small cases. Currently, each city has an additional regional court and a functioning designated body with comparative powers. When he hears criminal cases he is called a court, and when he hears general cases he becomes a district court. The primary issue is raised at an important rostrum and at a meeting of the arbiter. Each Territory's High Court has a division for revaluation versus lower courts. The Supreme Court limited the venue for consultation between and between governments, as well as the ability to examine the High Court's choice.^[15]

Security of Tenure, Accountability, and Progression

Each region of the province has a district court, which is the main court of a separate chamber for general affairs. In addition to the district court, there are civil courts. The designated bodies work under the direction and supervision of a local judge, and all general inquiries begin in the courts of judges. In any event, the District Judge may withdraw any case from any valid decision and accept it as his own. Complaints about the selection and use of common judges in circumstances where the size of the case does not exceed the established size are submitted by a regional judge. Each region has sessional judges and officers' courts. Criminal cases resulting in death, as well as cases arising from the requirements of the law, differing in hudud, are considered by the appointed bodies of the assembly. The acting judge may impose any penalty permitted by law. Justices of the peace are trying to commit crimes that did not entail death. Justices of the peace include justices of the peace of the first, second and third classes. The temptation to appeal a decision made by a sessional judge misleads the High Court, and a judge's decision misleads a sessional judge if the sentence is up to four years, in any case to the High Court.

District and Session Judge and His Role in District Judiciary

Currently, each city has a court with an additional seat and an acting judge, endowed with similar powers within its competence. When he hears criminal cases he is called a court, and when he hears general cases he becomes a local court. Leadership issues are raised in an important area and resolved in meetings.

Higher Judiciary

Supreme Court of Pakistan

The Supreme Court is the country's highest court with 27 special seats that change and require caution. This is the best court and the last middle person of the law and the Constitution. Its 28 29 varieties restrict all other courts. The Court is composed of a Chief Justice and various judges, 30 of whom are appointed by the President in accordance with the system set out in the Constitution. ^[16]The authoritative Law No. 31 establishes the number of judges at 17, for example, court presidents and 16 judges. There is also an agreement on the election of 32 acting authorized state bodies by an impromptu court decision. A person who has served 5 years as a High Court judge or 15 years as a colleague in the High Court is eligible to be 33 to be elected as a Supreme Court judge. The court has a new place to deal with governance issues, whether between government and government agencies or between governments. The Court is also rehearsing a remarkable Chamber concurrently with the High Courts in the 35 Fundamental Rights Claim, which includes the State Prize issue.

High Courts

There is a High Court in every district, but there is another High Court in the metropolitan area of ​​Islamabad. Each High Court is composed of a Chief Justice and other professional judges. There are 60 in the Lahore High Court, 40 in the Sindh High Court, 20 in the Peshawar High Court, 11 in the Balochistan High Court and 7 in the Islamabad High Court. ^[17]The indicated capacity of this office is 10 years experience as an assistant in the High Court or 10 years in administration as a civil servant, including 3 to 40 years of experience as a district judge or 10 years of experience in a law firm. In the past, the training of judges of the High Courts consisted of first the President of the relevant High Court drawing up a list of participants who were introduced to the President through the Governor and Chief Justice of the region. Justice of Pakistan. From this list, the President made the last definition. Consequently, although the Supreme Court in 41 Al-Jehad Trust v Federation ruled that the proposal of the Chief Justice of Pakistan and the Chief Justice of the High Court would restrict the President's actions, regardless of real motives.

Federal Shariat Court

The court consists of 8 government officials appointed by Muslims, including the chief arbiter. The philosophy of selecting judges in the Federal Sharia Court changed after the eighteenth and nineteenth versions, as such judges were recently appointed by the President from among current or retired judges of the Supreme Court or High Court, or from among those vested with relevant powers. Work designated organ of the High Court. ^[18] Currently, the judges of the Federal Sharia Court are additionally appointed by the Judicial Commission, which includes the Chief Justice of Pakistan as an administrator, four senior justices of the Supreme Court, one former executive director of the court, or a retired judge. Supreme Court. The President as well as four Supreme Court Justices, the Attorney General of Pakistan, the Federal Minister of Law and Justice, the President of the Federal Sharia Court and the most visible authority of the Federal Sharia Court in their respective fields. As far as the Chief Justice Association is concerned, in any case, the President of the Federal Sharia Court cannot be a member of the Commission. Although the Judicial Commission retains an alternative name for the association as the authorized body of the Federal Sharia Court, it is just an 8-section parliamentary board of trustees that proportionally portrays government and resistance as two chambers, like the Public Assembly. This board of trustees has fourteen days to review the proposal. If the proposal is supported, it goes to the chief administrator, who proposes the same for approval as the president. The Parliamentary Committee on Registration of Motives cannot confirm the proposal until 3/4, in such circumstances the decision is sent by the Commission through the Prime Minister and another consent must be sent by the Commission.^[19]

Judicial Appointments and Security Of Tenure Of High Courts Judges

The request for the position of judges in the high courts was changed after the eighteenth and nineteenth amendments. High Court justices are appointed by the Judicial Commission and the Parliamentary Committee. The Judicial Commission is composed of High Court justices as its President, Chief Justice of Pakistan, as well as four senior Supreme Court justices, one former Chief Justice or a retired former Supreme Court Justice. Supreme Court Justices, Pakistan's Attorney General, Federal Minister of Law and Justice, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and a senior High Court official speak with an appointed ordinary pastor and legal counsel (from the age of fifteen) separately by another chamber of the Assembly of Legal Advisers. For the appointment of the Chief Justice, the President of the High Court is not required as a member of the Commission. Although the Judicial Commission supports an alternative name for the association as a High Court judge, it is just an eight-section parliamentary council that shares the same image of government and resistance as the two chambers, such as the Public Assembly and the Senate. This committee has fourteen days to consider the proposal. If the proposal is supported, it is sent to the prime minister, who proposes something almost identical to the president for approval. The Parliamentary Committee on Registration of Motives in general cannot confirm proposal 3/4; in this situation, the decision is submitted to the Judicial Commission through the Prime Minister, after which another consent of the commission - the heads of specific high courts - must be sent. The basic constitution of 1973 made such trade a state of consensus as assemblies. A regulation added by the 1976 Constitutional Act (Fifth Amendment) obliges the President to require such trade for a period not exceeding one year; By Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 14 of 1985, this period was increased from one year to two years. This agreement was canceled by the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution and by the main clause. At present, a High Court Judge cannot be removed from office without his consent and consultation with the Chief Justice of Pakistan and the Chief Justices of both High Courts.

Judicial Appointment Commission

The Judicial Commission of Pakistan (now and again the JCP) is a commission composed of the Supreme Court and justices of the High Court of Pakistan. [1] The Chief Justice of Pakistan is the executive director of the PCO. On April 20, 2010, the Parliament of Pakistan passed the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which was amended by the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution. [2] To ensure consistency with the amendments, it was proposed to establish a legal commission that would provide seats for judges of Pakistan's largest courts. The following is a summary of Article 175 (A), which was incorporated into the Pakistani constitution through this amendment.

Procedure for Selection Of Judges Of Higher Judiciary

(1) Appointment of judges to the Supreme Court, High Courts and Federal Sharia Court: The Judicial Commission of Pakistan, hereinafter referred to as the Commission, will be established to form judges of the Supreme Court, High Courts and the Federal Sharia Court as shown below. (2) To decide on the creation of justices of the Supreme Court, the Commission will be composed of: (i) the Chief Justice of Pakistan - the President; (ii) four senior justices of the Supreme Court individually; (iii) a former Chief Justice or a former Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan who is appointed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan along with [four] justices for a two-year term; (iv) the Federal Minister of Law and Justice as part; (v) Attorney General of Pakistan as part; (vi) Senior Counsel to the Supreme Court of Pakistan, delegated by the Pakistan Bar Council for a two-year term. (3) Regardless of condition (1) or explanation (2), the President chooses the most senior arbitrator of the Supreme Court as the Chief Justice of Pakistan.^[20]

(4) The Commission may establish rules for the management of its equipment (5-7

(8) The Commission, with its full support, will select one person to serve on the Parliamentary Committee for each opportunity to be an arbitrator before the Supreme Court, High Court or Federal Sharia Court, subject to all conditions.

(9) The Parliamentary Committee, hereinafter referred to as the Committee, will be composed of eight persons accompanying it, namely: (i) four persons from the Senate; and (ii) four people from the National Assembly. Whereas, after the dissolution of the National Assembly, the entire constituent part of the parliamentary group will consist of the representatives of the Senate just mentioned in area (I), and the provisions of this article will apply mutatis mutandis.^[21]

(10) Of the eight people from the Committee, four will be from the Treasury, two from each room and four from the Resistance, two from each room. The selection of persons from the places of storage will be carried out by the head of the cell, and from places of resistance - by the head of the resistance.

(11) The Secretary of the Senate acts as the Secretary of the Committee.

(12) The Committee, having received an assignment from the Commission, may approve the elected person for most of his full participation within fourteen days, after which the choice will be considered confirmed: provided that the Committee, for reasons of inclusion, cannot confirm the appointment for three quarters of the majority of them completing on time. Considering further that, if the appointment is not confirmed by the Committee, it will facilitate its selection by stating the reasons thus recorded with the Commission through the Prime Minister. Considering further that if the appointment is not confirmed, the Commission will send another option.^[22]

(13) The council will send the name of a newcomer whom it supports or deems approved to the executive branch, which will send something basically the same as consent to the president.

(14) No step or choice made by the Commission or committee will be canceled or mentioned solely on the basis of absence or absence of participation in any of its meetings.

(15) The meetings of the Committee are held out of sight of the public, the minutes of its work are kept.

(16) The method provided for in article 68 does not affect the methodology of the Committee.

(17) The council may lay down rules to control its method.

Under the 2010 eighteenth amendment, there were two talks in Pakistan about the whereabouts of judges of the transcendental presidential section of the executive branch: the Judicial Commission, which belongs to the presidential branch of government, investigators, and the government body responsible for proposing the names of judges. according to their point of view; and the Parliamentary Council [PC] approves or rejects these names, but gives reasons if any name is rejected.

This system did indeed limit the powers of the president and the political leader, which subsequently raised doubts in practice, but targeted advertising appeared in the media stating that "the SDP forces are not being followed" for the sake of an "important meeting" [the state invented and actually emphasizes CJP Sajjad Ali Shah]. The Eighteenth Amendment additionally provided (see section 175A, paragraph 3) that the President appoints the Chief Executive Officer of the Supreme Court to replace the CJP, accordingly formally adopting the standard of status and sincere expectations formulated by the Zenith Court in Al-Delo Jihad, and that same accent in some different cases.^[23]

Procedure for Removal

An unusual agreement was reached in the high court that it is madness for most judges to weaken the absolute number of judges in a court or, again, if necessary, increase the number of judges in a court. High Court. The selection is made directly by a Judicial Commission, headed by the Chief Justice, who prepares a summary of the agreement when the President supports their agreement. Currently, two judges of the Federal Sharia Court are working on an ill-conceived game plan. A Supreme Court Justice must be removed from office in accordance with the Constitution, on the basis of rebuttal or inaction, and in accordance with the decree of the President of Pakistan. The completed will must be sent by the Supreme Judicial Council, which will make recommendations on inappropriate protests, resulting in a decision to clear the authorized body.^[24]

Summary

Pakistan's current legal institutions date back to the middle age and, surprisingly, earlier. The legal system we practice today has evolved over an enormous period of time, mostly over 1000 years. The design has existed for several centuries, crossing Hindu times, Muslim timelines, including the Mughal Empire, the British border timeline, and post-autonomous education. Despite reformist changes such as the replacement of one norm / line with another, usually due to monetary and political changes in Indian culture, the legal framework as a whole supports a predictable turn of events and constant progress towards unification and improvement / improvement obviously without significant wear or damage. In light of everything, the design has gone through 3 stages of development, which reflect, in particular, the Hindu kingdom, the Muslim standard and the British border organisation. The fourth and current period began with the partition of India and the transformation of Pakistan into a sovereign and self-governing state. Thus, the plan has undergone a number of changes and updates. This goal is highly respected due to the almost consistent agreement of classical traders and scholars on the historical basis of Indian law. During this turn of events and communications aimed at promoting, the legal system was touched and stimulated by new shows / thoughts and similar principles / practices, both in terms of ship design, value chain, and in terms of eliminating and acquiring a fundamental strategy / the exercise. Consequently, the current legitimate system, of course, is not a completely new interpretation, as is often guaranteed, but it has acquired a special and social connotation. In addition, while these aspects may not be entirely consistent with the virtuoso beliefs of our family members or local conditions, their further application and practice made them acceptable to the normal person. The very reality that more and more people will go to court to solve their cases / problems shows that design influences the degree of validity and acceptability.

References

Ahmed, Naeem. "Combating Terrorism: Pakistan's Anti-Terrorism Legislation in the Post-9/11 Scenario." Journal of the Research Society of Pakistan 52, no. 2 (2015): 115-132.

Ahmed, Sanaa. "Supremely fallible? A debate on judicial restraint and activism in Pakistan." ICL Journal 9, no. 2 (2015): 213-239.

Awais, Hasan, and Muhammad Amir Munir. "Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Trial Courts of Pakistan: A Practical Approach Towards New Era of Timely Justice as a Means of ‘Justice for All’." In Report of 8th Judicial Conference, Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan (2018), Forthcoming. 2018.

Badawi, Adam B., and Scott Baker. "Appellate lawmaking in a judicial hierarchy." The Journal of Law and Economics 58, no. 1 (2015): 139-172.

Bashir, Mohsin. "Public Policy Processes and Citizen Participation in Pakistan." In Public Administration in South Asia, pp. 395-407. Routledge, 2017.

Baştürk, Savaş. "Public personnel selection examination used in teacher appointments in Turkey: Through the eyes of primary school prospective teachers." European Journal of Education Studies (2017).

Beim, Deborah. "Learning in the judicial hierarchy." The Journal of Politics 79, no. 2 (2017): 591-604.

Bonica, Adam, and Maya Sen. "A common-space scaling of the American judiciary and legal profession." Political Analysis 25, no. 1 (2017): 114-121.

Cheema, Moeen H. "Two steps forward one step back: The non-linear expansion of judicial power in Pakistan." International journal of constitutional law 16, no. 2 (2018): 503-526.

Crouch, Melissa. "The judiciary in Myanmar." UNSW Law Research Paper 2016-10 (2016).

Elms, Natalie, Gavin Nicholson, and Amedeo Pugliese. "The importance of group-fit in new director selection." Management Decision (2015).

Grove, Tara Leigh. "Tiers of scrutiny in a hierarchical judiciary." Geo. JL & Pub. Pol'y 14 (2016): 475.

Grynaviski, Eric, and Amy Hsieh. "Hierarchy and Judicial Institutions: Arbitration and Ideology in the Hellenistic World." International Organisation 69, no. 3 (2015): 697-729.

Hitt, Matthew P. "Measuring precedent in a judicial hierarchy." Law & Society Review 50, no. 1 (2016): 57-81.

Husain, Waris. The Judicialisation of Politics in Pakistan: A Comparative Study of Judicial Restraint and Its Development in India, the US and Pakistan. Routledge, 2018.

Kastellec, Jonathan P. "The judicial hierarchy: A review essay." (2016).

Li, Yuwen. The judicial system and reform in Post-Mao China: Stumbling towards justice. Routledge, 2016.

Mahmood, Amna, Shaukat Ullah, and Shughla Ashfaq. "The evolution of Jirga system: A conflict resolution mechanism in FATA." Liberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal 2, no. 1 (2018): 21-28.

Miller, Susan M. "The relationship between short-term political appointments and bureaucratic performance: The case of recess appointments in the United States." Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25, no. 3 (2015): 777-796.

O’brien, David M. "17. The Politics of Judicial Selection and Appointments in Japan and Ten South and Southeast Asian Countries." In Appointing Judges in an Age of Judicial Power, pp. 355-374. University of Toronto Press, 2018.

Pietsch, Tamson. "Geographies of selection: Academic appointments in the British academic world, 1850–1939." In Mobilities of knowledge, pp. 157-183. Springer, Cham, 2017.

Shamim, Syed Jazib. "A Review on Judicial Activism in Pakistan." Available at SSRN 3126641 (2018).

van Zyl Smit, Jan. "‘Opening up’Commonwealth judicial appointments to diversity?: The growing role of commissions in judicial selection." In Debating Judicial Appointments in an Age of Diversity, pp. 60-82. Routledge, 2017.

Walker, Lee Demetrius. "A Multi-Level Explanation of Mass Support for the Judiciary." Justice System Journal 37, no. 3 (2016): 194-210.