Policy making
Policy making legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
In cases involving utilities and economic regulation, there are good reasons for judicial restraint and/ or judicial deference to legislative judgment; it not the responsibility of the Court to regulate economic policy
Courts must confine themselves to legal interpretation
High Court must satisfy itself that there is a breach of fundamental rights, vested constitutional/legal rights before any direction is issued
Such directions must not be based on an understanding of the law which is contrary to the Constitution.
Policy making is an executive function and is not amenable to judicial review by High Courts unless the policy falls in any of the exceptions to the general rule
Exceptions include if a policy is shown to be in violation of fundamental rights, inconsistent to Constitutional and statutory provisions, or demonstrably arbitrary, capricious, mala fide, discriminatory or unreasonable or opposed to public policy.
Framing of government policy is to be undertaken by the Executive, which is in a better position to decide on account of its mandate, experience, wisdom and sagacity, which are acquired through diverse skills.
Even Courts do not intervene in the policy matters unless such policies are perverse, ab initio void or against Constitutional guarantees
Where Federal Government or Provincial Government formulate a policy in accordance with law and under the mandate of the Constitution but not in an conformity with any policy of a private body, may it be an international body, the policy promulgated in Pakistan by its Government would prevail upon statute, policy, direction etc. of such international body.
Making policy is prerogative of government and Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction cannot make policy for government
Court cannot interfere in government policy unless there is infringement of legal rights or found to be ultra vires to the Constitution and injunction of Islam.
Courts should ordinarily refrain from interfering in policy making domain of the Executive.
Making policy is prerogative of government and Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction cannot make policy for government
Court cannot interfere in government policy unless there is infringement of legal rights or found to be ultra vires to the Constitution and injunction of Islam.
Functions of policy making or determining priorities of various development projects in the country, were the exclusive domain and function of the Federal and Provincial Governments, as the case might be, who had their own ministers, departments, commission and consultants, etc. for policy making and for determining priorities of various projects and their implementation.
"Policy making", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124939630
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Policy making"
P L D 2021 High Court (AJK) 1
FAYYAZ AHMED JANJUA, ADVOCATE, SUPREME COURT OF AJ&K and 2 others — Petitioners Versus LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Speaker Legislative Assembly and 3 others — Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 2013 Supreme Court 167
WATAN PARTY and another — Petitioners Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents
Court:2023 M L D 1285
FEROZ KHAN SHUJA and others — Petitioners Versus PAKISTAN MEDICAL COMMISSION through President, Islamabad and another — Respondents
Court: PeshawarP L D 2022 Supreme Court (AJ&K) 35
MUHAMMAD YASIR SAFEER MUGHAL — Appellant Versus FAYYAZ AHMED JANJUA and 6 others — Respondents
Court: High Court2012 P L C (C
Ch. AHSAN AHMAD, JUDGE ACCOUNTABILITY COURT NO.1, LAHORE and 2 others Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN LAW AND JUSTICE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD through Secretary and another
Court: Lahore High Court1997 C L C 174,
KHALILUR REHMAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Engineer IQBAL ZAFAR JHAGRA
Court: Election Tribunal N.W.F.P2011 P L C (C
MUHAMMAD NUSRAT ALI and 3 others Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh and 3 others
Court: Sindh High Court1988 C L C 578
Dr: Syed FAROOQ HASSAN‑‑Petitioner Versus MUMTAZ AHMED KHAN‑‑Respondent
Court: Election Tribunal PunjabP L D 1980 Lahore 802
MUHAMMAD TAHIR AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus DIRECTOR‑GENERAL, NATIONAL GUARDS (THE NATIONAL CREDIT CORPS), RAWALPINDI AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents
Court:2024 C L C 171
NAVEED MUSHTAQ ABBASI — Petitioner Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others — Respondents
Court: Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)