From Jurist Ijtihad to Neo-Ijtihad: The Evolution of Judicial Interpretation in Contemporary Legal System of Pakistan

Abstract

In this article, we explore the development of Ijtihad —the Islamic jurisprudential principle of individual thinking—from its traditional form, Jurist Ijtihad, into a contemporary and adaptive paradigm known as Neo-Ijtihad, within the specific context of the Pakistani legal system. In the classical tradition, Ijtihad served as a necessary tool for deriving legal verdicts from the Quran and the Sunnah such that jurists could address emerging social problems. However, over the course of centuries, the practice became circumscribed as a consequence of an overabundant emphasis on taqlid (compliance with precedent), especially in locations such as Pakistan, where Islamic law coexisted with colonial law systems. Enforcement of legislation such as the Hudood Ordinaces and the establishment of the Shariat Appellate Bench were notable but difficult undertakings to integrate Islamic ideology into the present system of governance. In the face of such hindrances, Neo-Ijtihad emerged as an adaptive and malleable form of judicial interpretation capable of addressing contemporary concerns such as human rights, gender equality, and environmental protection and staying true to the essence of Islamic ideology. Through an analysis of the case studies and the critical judicial judgments, the article highlights the shift from classical Ijtihad to Neo-Ijtihad and reveals the potential it possesses for transforming the Pakistani system of law. Through embracing the latter, the judiciary can make Islamic law more relevant and just to the evolving social needs of the day