Introduction

Few countries can claim as rich and varied an experience of extraordinary rule as Pakistan. Pakistan has been governed under either emergency rule or martial law for the greater part of its history. Pakistani lawyers and intellectuals have given a great deal of thought to the problems posed by these kinds of extraordinary rule and their effect on the rule of law. In this Chapter, I will discuss how one famous and thoughtful liberal judge in Pakistan responded to the repeated imposition of emergency rule, martial law and guided democracy during his years on the bench. I will describe how he came up with a most surprising proposal for strengthening the rule of law so that extraordinary rule was either unnecessary or, when imposed, restrained. The judge in question is A. R. Cornelius, a famous Christian justice of the Pakistani Supreme Court – renowned for his repeated defence of the position that judges must play an active role in defending fundamental rights against executive overreach. His proposal was to Islamise the Pakistani legal system.

Cornelius has long stood as a hero to liberals in Pakistan and abroad for his courageous defence of fundamental rights during periods of extraordinary rule. He is particularly admired for dissents he wrote during Pakistan's first state of emergency and first martial law. In these dissents, Cornelius decried his colleagues' unwillingness to challenge executive assertions of power.