Judicialization of Politics in Pakistan (2016–2025): Its Impact on Democratic Governance

Abstract

The increasing involvement of the judiciary in politically significant matters has become an important feature of Pakistan's constitutional and democratic development. Between 2016 and 2025, the superior judiciary dealt with several disputes involving political accountability, the eligibility of elected representatives, parliamentary proceedings, executive authority, and the institutional structure of the judiciary. This article examines the judicialization of politics in Pakistan during this period and evaluates its consequences for democratic governance. The study employs a qualitative research design based on documentary analysis of judicial decisions, constitutional documents, scholarly literature, and institutional reports. Particular attention is given to the Panama case and the disqualification of Nawaz Sharif, the broader expansion of judicial review, the constitutional crisis surrounding the no-confidence motion in 2022, and the Twenty-Sixth and Twenty-Seventh Constitutional Amendments. The article argues that judicialization has produced both positive and negative consequences. Judicial intervention has strengthened constitutional accountability and, in some instances, protected constitutional procedures. At the same time, the growing political significance of judicial decisions has intensified tensions between the judiciary and elected institutions and raised questions concerning judicial restraint and separation of powers. The article concludes that democratic governance in Pakistan requires an appropriate balance between judicial independence and judicial restraint, with courts protecting constitutionalism while respecting the legitimate functions of representative institutions.