Full Picture

Extension usage examples:

Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
May be slightly imbalanced

Article summary:

1. Judicial activism, a form of judicial review, is being increasingly exercised by the Supreme Court of Pakistan to check the arbitrariness of State actions and policies.

2. Critics argue that the Supreme Court's activism may be overreaching and damaging democratic values by interfering in the affairs of the State beyond its jurisdictional domain.

3. The research paper explores whether judicial activism by the Supreme Court of Pakistan is hindering democratic development or actually improving governance by setting a roadmap for future stability and good governance in the country.

Article analysis:

The article "Judicial Activism Shaping the Future of Pakistan" provides a detailed overview of the concept of judicial activism and its impact on democratic development in Pakistan. The author discusses the historical background of judicial review, citing cases from the United Kingdom and the United States that laid the foundation for this legal principle. The author also highlights the role of judicial activism in Pakistan, particularly after the restoration of de jure judiciary in 2009.

One potential bias in the article is the author's apparent support for judicial activism. While the author acknowledges criticisms of over-activity by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, they ultimately argue that judicial activism is necessary to check arbitrariness and improve governance. This bias may lead to a one-sided presentation of information, as it focuses primarily on the positive aspects of judicial activism without fully exploring potential drawbacks or counterarguments.

Additionally, some claims made in the article are not adequately supported with evidence. For example, when discussing the impact of judicial activism on democratic development in Pakistan, the author asserts that it is setting a roadmap for future stability and good governance. However, there is limited empirical evidence provided to support this claim, leaving it somewhat unsubstantiated.

Furthermore, there are missing points of consideration in the article. For instance, while discussing criticisms of judicial activism interfering with democratic values, there is little exploration of how such interference could potentially undermine democratic institutions or processes. A more balanced approach would involve considering both sides of the argument and addressing potential risks associated with excessive judicial intervention.

Overall, while "Judicial Activism Shaping the Future of Pakistan" provides a comprehensive overview of its topic, there are areas where improvements could be made to enhance its objectivity and thoroughness. By addressing potential biases, providing more evidence for claims made, exploring counterarguments, and presenting both sides equally, the article could offer a more nuanced analysis of judicial activism in Pakistan.