Islamic Constitutionalism and Judicial Activism: A Comparative Study of Pakistan, Malaysia, and the United Kingdom

Abstract

This study examines Islamic constitutionalism and judicial activism in Pakistan, Malaysia, and the United Kingdom. It explores how courts interpret religious and secular norms, balancing constitutional principles with societal values. Using comparative legal analysis, the research highlights divergent judicial roles, mechanisms of activism, and challenges in rights protection, revealing insights into law, religion, and governance across differing constitutional frameworks. This article examines the relationship between Islamic constitutionalism and judicial activism through a comparative lens focused on Pakistan, Malaysia, and the United Kingdom UK It explores how Islamic principles inform constitutional orders, the role of judiciaries in interpreting religious norms in public law, and the jurisprudential balance between democratic governance and religious values. The study argues that while Pakistan and Malaysia directly embed Islamic norms into their constitutional frameworks, the UK’s secular constitutionalism offers contrasting lessons on judicial restraint and pluralism.