A Doctrinal Analysis of Constitutional Guarantees and Judicial Praxis for Religious Minorities in Pakistan

Abstract

The study explored jurisdictional investigation of the status of religious minorities in Pakistan and examined the discrepancy between the guarantees within the constitution and the judicial process. The statements of the founding fathers and the founding documents of Pakistan envisioned that all citizens regardless of their faith would enjoy equal rights and religious freedom in Pakistan. This paper summarizes the constitutional evolution through history while critically analyzing landmark court decisions with the Ahmadiyya community as a case study. The study describes three stages of judicial attitude: an initial stage of a broad defence (1947-1972), one of submission to majoritarian constitutional reforms (1973-1977) and a last stage of submission to authoritarian and religiously orthodox influences (post-1977): results including Zaheeruddin v. State. The study finds that there exists an enormous discrepancy between what is provided in the Constitution and how it is applied in actual practice due to lack of uniformity in the judiciary and expediency of politics. Using a qualitative, doctrinal methodology, this paper finds that the inability of the judiciary to maintain a non-partisan approach in relations with the political and ideological mainstream has dramatically undermined its purpose as a protector of fundamental rights and places religious minorities, regardless of constitutional guarantees, in a fatal and precarious circumstance.

Keywords: Religious Minorities, Pakistan Constitution, Judicial Review, Freedom of Religion, Ahmadiyya, Doctrinal Legal Research, Fundamental Rights, Islamic Law.