Introduction

Abstract

There is no gain in saying that the judiciary, executive and legislature are the most important pillars of governance of any state and Pakistan is no exception. However, in the past, relationship between these organs have not been without hindrances and this has badly marred the march of democracy in the country. Upon loss of one wing of the state in 1971, all political parties agreed to draft another constitution which was ultimately passed in 1973. This constitution sought to introduce much needed checks and balances, mitigate the hitherto controversial role of judiciary and executive, and preclude the future issuance of highly controversial doctrines of necessity. Despite best intentions and a quasi-unanimous passing of the constitution, implementation turned out to be yet again highly centrist at the cost of federating units. It is only through the 18th Amendment in 2010 that a proper devolution has been initiated. The division of powers has been constitutionally determined, yet the modus operandi needs to be properly put on track in some instances. Although in many instances, the constitution seemingly continues to be selfcontradictory. This especially applies to the status of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). While there is the guarantee of fundamental rights for all citizens, inhabitants of FATA do not enjoy access to the judiciary, e.g. the High Court or Supreme Court. Instead, pursuant to the Frontier Crimes Regulation of 1901, civil and criminal cases are tried through a hotchpotch of legal norms derived from riwaj (customs and norms) and shariah (Islamic laws) by local jargah (council of elders) and religious scholars respectively, duly sanctioned by a political agent.