Policy Input on Human Rights Issues by the Supreme Judiciary in Pakistan: Application of Stage Model of Public Policy
Keywords:
Human Rights, Policy Input, Supreme Judiciary, Official Policy Actor, PakistanAbstract
The researches have revealed the legislature as the policy or law-making body and the executive branch as the policy implementing body whereas the third pillar of the state, the judiciary, is considered as a legal institute working as an arbitrator in all legal matters. However, the increasing pieces of evidence depict that the judiciary not only acts as an arbitrator in all legal controversies but also plays a role in public policymaking and politics. It is one of the official actors that plays its role in policy processes. This paper examines the role of the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCP) in generating policy input at different stages of policy making. Content and thematic analysis methods have been used on all judicial verdicts given by the SCP on Human Rights Cases (HRCs). The time period ranges from 2009 to 2019. Purposive sampling technique is utilized to draw a sample containing HRCs from the population of judicial verdicts given by SC during the last ten years. The analysis reveals that the Supreme Judiciary provides its policy input and impacts policy process. It has the power to play its significant role in policymaking by giving policy input in problem identification and agenda-setting, policy formulation, policy adoption, and policy evaluation. The policy input given by SCP should be utilized in an effective way to reduce human rights issues and alleviate the infringement of fundamental rights of the citizens of Pakistan.
Downloads
References
Afzal, M. (2009). Population growth and economic development in Pakistan. The Open Demography Journal, 2(1).
Ahmad, B. (2011). Water Management: A Solution to Water Scarcity in Pakistan. Journal of Independent Studies and Research. 9, 111-125.
Anderson, J. E. (1984). Cases in public policy-making, (2nd Edition). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Barnes, J. (2017). Courts and Social Policy. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.
Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (Eds.). (2002). Policy dynamics. University of Chicago Press.
Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. Glencoe, Ill: Free Press.
Bignami, F. (2011). Cooperative legalism and the non-Americanization of European regulatory styles: The case of data privacy. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 59(2), 411-461.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Brewer, G. D., & deLeon, P. (1983). The Foundations of Policy Analysis (Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole).
Casper, J. D. (1976). The Supreme Court and national policy making. The American Political Science Review, 70(1), 50-63.
CCI unanimously approves national water policy. (2018, April 25). Dawn. Retrieved from: https://www.dawn.com/news/1403743
Chayes, A. (1976). The Role of the Judge in Public Law Litigation, 89 Harvard L.
Dahl, R. A. (1957). Decision-making in a democracy: The Supreme Court as a national policy-maker. J. Pub. L., 6, 279-95.
DeLeon, P. (1999). The Stages Approach to the Policy Process, What Has It Done? Where Is It Going'in Sabatier, PA (ed), (1999), Theories of the Policy Process. Westview Press, Colorado. (19-32). 19-32).
Dunn, W. N. (1981). An introduction to public policy analysis. Englewood Clifls.
Dye, T. R. (2004). Understanding public policy, (10th Edition). Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
(2008). Understanding Public Policy, (12th edition). Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
(2012). Understanding Public Policy, (14th Edition). Pearson.
Faundez, J. (2016). Douglass North’s theory of institutions: lessons for law and development. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 8(2), 373-419.
Federal Budget with total outlay of Rs7022bn announced. (2019, June 13). Radio Pakistan. Retrieved from: http://www.radio.gov.pk/11-06-2019/new-budget-envisages-total-development-outlay-of-rs1863b-for-next- fiscal-year
Feeley, M. M., & Rubin, E. L. (1998). Judicial policy making and the modern state: How the courts reformed America's prisons. Cambridge University Press.
Feeley, P. M., & Rubin, E. (1998). Judicial Policy Making and the Modern State: How the Courts Reformed America's Prisons (Cambridge Studies in Criminology). Cambridge University Press.
Fitz, J., Halpin, D., & Power, S. (1994). Implementation research and education policy: practice and prospects. British Journal of Educational Studies, 42(1), 53-69.
Galanter, M. (1974). Why the haves come out ahead: Speculations on the limits of legal change. Law & Soc'y Rev., 9, 95-160.
Ginsburg, T. (2003). Judicial review in new democracies: Constitutional courts in Asian cases. Cambridge University Press.
Hirschl, R. (2004). Towards juristocracy: the origins and consequences of the new constitutionalism. Harvard University Press.
Hirschl, R. (2008). The judicialization of politics. In The Oxford handbook of political science. (119-141).
Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (1995). Policy cycles and policy subsystems. Canada: Oxford university press.
Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2003). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystems. Toronto: Oxford University Press. https://www.sdpi.org/publications/files/PB-35-by-Asif-Wazir.pdf
Iqbal, A. R. (2010). Water Shortage in Pakistan-A Crisis around the Corner. Institute for Strategic Studies, Research & Analysis (ISSRA) PAPERS. 2(2).
Kagan, R. A. (1997). Should Europe worry about adversarial legalism. Oxford J. Legal Stud., 17, 165.
Kagan, R. A. (2007). Globalization and legal change: The “Americanization” of European law?. Regulation & Governance, 1(2), 99-120.
Kelemen, R. D. (2011). Eurolegalism: The transformation of law and regulation in the European Union. Harvard University Press.
Khalid, I., & Khan, M. A. (2016). Water Scarcity-A Major Human Security Challenge to Pakistan. South Asian Studies, 31(2), 143.
Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage publications.
Kulaç, O., & Özgür, H. (2017). An overview of the stages (heuristics) model as a public policy analysis framework. Eur Sci J, 13(12), 144-57.
Lasswell, H. D. (1956). The decision process: Seven categories of functional analysis. Bureau of Governmental Research, College of Business and Public Administration, University of Maryland.
McCombs, M. (2002). News influence on our pictures of the world. In Media effects edited by Bryant, J. and Zillman, D. UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
Minority Rights Group. (2014). “Peoples under Threat 2014”. Retrieved from: https://minorityrights.org/12369/peoples-under-threat/peoples-under-threat-2014.html
Munir, K., & Khalid, I. (2018). Judicial Activism in Pakistan: A Case Study of Supreme Court Judgments 2008-13. South Asian Studies (1026-678X), 33(2).
No tax deduction on mobile top-up for 15 days. (2018, June 13). Pakistan Today. Retrieved from: https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2018/06/13/no-tax-deduction-on-mobile-top-up-for-15-days/
North, D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of economic perspectives, 5(1), 97-112.
Peters, B. G. (1996). American public policy: Promise and performance. Cq Press.
Reig., P., Maddocks. A. & Gassert. F. (2013). World’s 36 Most Water Stressed Countries. World Resources Institute. Retrieved from: https://www.wri.org/blog/2013/12/world-s-36-most-water-stressed-countries
Ripley, R. B., & Franklin, G. A. (1984). Congress, the bureaucracy, and public policy. Dorsey Press.
Sabatier, P. A. (1999). The Theories of the Policy Process. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
Sabatier, P. A. (2007). The Theories of the Policy Process, (2nd Edition). Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
Sandler, R., & Schoenbrod, D. (2003). Democracy by decree: What happens when courts run government. Yale University Press.
Sweet, A. S. (1999). Judicialization and the Construction of Governance. Comparative Political Studies, 32(2), 147-184.
Sweet, A. S. (2000). Governing with judges: constitutional politics in Europe. OUP Oxford.
Tahir, H., & Tahira, I. (2016). Freedom of Religion and Status of Religious Minorities in Pakistan. International Journal of Management Sciences and Business Research, 5(12).
Taylor, M. M. (2008). Judging policy: courts and policy reform in democratic Brazil. Stanford University Press.
United Nations Development Programme. Water Security in Pakistan: Issues and Challenges. (2016). Development Advocate Pakistan. 3(4). Retrieved from: https://www.undp.org/content/dam/pakistan/docs/DevelopmentPolicy/DAP%20Volume3,%20Issue4%20E nglish.pdf
United States. General Accounting Office. Program Evaluation, & Methodology Division. (1996). Content analysis: a methodology for structuring and analyzing written material. US General Accounting Office.
Vallinder, T., & Tate, C. N. (1997). Global expansion of judicial power. New York University Press.
Wazir, M.A. (2013). Population Dynamics in Pakistan: Past, Present and Future.
Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis (No. 49). Sage.
Willemsen, M. C. (2018). Problem Identification and Agenda Setting. In Problem IdentificatiTobacco Control Policy in the Netherlands (pp. 271-304). Palgrave Macmillan.
World Bank. (1989). Pakistan Rapid Population Growth in Pakistan Concerns and Consequence. Retrieved from: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/846451468098379399/Rapid-population-growth-in- Pakistan-concerns-and-consequences
Zaigham, N.M. (2010). Advocating for inclusive electoral processes, for minority rights and for rule of law in South Asia: Report on issues faced by minorities in Pakistan. Retrieved from: http://www.southasianrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/IEP-Pakistan-Final.pdf.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
