Inherited Chains: How Colonial-Era Laws Continue to Shape Pakistan’s Justice System

The process of state-building in postcolonial societies is often complicated by the lingering imprint of colonial governance. In Pakistan’s case, independence in 1947 did not trigger a wholesale legal or administrative reset. Instead, the country inherited a legal and institutional framework deeply rooted in British colonial practices.

Colonial statutes were crafted to secure empire, not justice—but over seven decades later, they still guide Pakistan’s legal system.

Pakistan’s first constitution was adopted in 1956, but the foundations of governance had already been laid upon pre-existing colonial statutes and administrative models. Many of these laws remain operative, shaping institutions that were originally designed not to serve citizens but to secure the interests of the colonial state.

Colonial Statutes and Their Persistence

Several colonial-era laws remain central to Pakistan’s governance.

The Police Rules of 1934 are a telling example. Crafted for colonial Punjab, the rules established a force meant to secure imperial authority rather than deliver public service (Asia Society, 2011). This framework entrenched a policing culture marked by hierarchical rigidity, weak accountability, and excessive state authority—problems that persist to this day.

Water management, too, is still regulated by colonial-era legislation. The Canal and Drainage Act of 1873, introduced to administer the Indus Basin’s irrigation system, primarily aimed to expand revenue and cement colonial political control through agriculture (Mustafa, 2010). Despite amendments, the Act continues to govern irrigation practices, perpetuating inequities in water distribution and obstructing modern approaches to environmental sustainability.

The Police Rules of 1934 entrenched a hierarchical, state-centric policing culture that persists in Pakistan today.

Land ownership reflects similar legacies. The Land Acquisition Act of 1894, which empowered the colonial government to seize land for vaguely defined “public purposes,” is still in force (Daily Times, 2019). Critics argue that the Act facilitates dispossession, often without fair compensation or resettlement, particularly for marginalized communities (The Friday Times, 2025). While Sindh and Balochistan have introduced updated legislation and Punjab began reviewing the Act in 2025, the colonial framework largely persists.

Religion was also instrumentalized by the colonial state. The blasphemy provisions, introduced in the Indian Penal Code of 1860, were initially intended to maintain communal harmony in a diverse colony. In Pakistan, these provisions were expanded into some of the most controversial features of the legal system. Human rights advocates argue that their misuse has led to grave miscarriages of justice and eroded due process (International Commission of Jurists, 2015).

Colonial restrictions on dissent were similarly absorbed. Section 124-A of the Penal Code—the sedition law—was used under British rule to suppress anti-colonial movements. Post-independence, it was employed by successive governments in Pakistan to silence political opposition. In March 2023, the Lahore High Court struck it down as unconstitutional, a landmark decision that underscored the urgency of dismantling colonial-era tools of repression (Dawn, 2023).

Colonial Structures of Governance

Colonialism left behind more than individual statutes; it entrenched institutional cultures.

The civil service, established by the British to maintain imperial efficiency, continues to operate under hierarchical rigidity. Scholars argue that this fosters inefficiency, corruption, and a prioritization of bureaucratic authority over citizen welfare (Khan, 2017).

The judiciary also reflects colonial continuities. English remains the primary language of legal proceedings, effectively alienating the majority of Pakistan’s citizens who speak local languages. This linguistic barrier not only reinforces elitism but also curtails access to justice (Newberg, 1995). More broadly, many legal frameworks still reflect colonial priorities—state control over citizen liberties, rather than empowerment of the governed.

Reform and Resistance

Despite these enduring legacies, Pakistan has taken steps toward reform. The Lahore High Court’s abolition of sedition laws was an important milestone. Similarly, progressive legal recognition of marginalized groups—such as the inclusion of transgender persons in national identity documents—represents a departure from colonial hierarchies of exclusion.

Civil society organizations are increasingly pushing for reforms in land and water management, emphasizing equitable distribution and ecological sustainability. Yet these reforms remain slow, fragmented, and heavily contested.

Breaking the Colonial Mold

Pakistan’s legal and political systems continue to bear the deep imprint of colonial rule. From the Police Rules of 1934 and the Canal and Drainage Act of 1873 to the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 and blasphemy provisions, colonial statutes remain embedded in the state’s governance structure.

While piecemeal reforms have occurred, genuine decolonization demands more than incremental change. It requires a fundamental rethinking of legal principles and governance models, aligning them with Pakistan’s cultural, social, and democratic aspirations.

Only by confronting these inherited chains can Pakistan build a justice system that reflects not the priorities of a bygone empire, but the values and needs of its own people.

Urwah Iftikhar is a researcher focusing on rights and justice, currently pursuing graduate studies in international development in the U.K.