This article makes a comparative analysis of how Pakistan and Singapore manage to navigate in the legal ambit of pluralism within the dual framework of a centralized, common law-based legal system. Pakistan is a deeply-rooted, socially sedimented pluralism formed by Islamic law, ethnicity and informal justice. In contrast, Singapore controls limited pluralism through a technocratic system and highly centralized legal system. By studying both reforms and law-making, the article brings up institutional and ideological distinctions, ranging from the legal disorganization of Pakistan to the naturalization of legitimacy issues in Singapore. It analyzes how, properly handled, legal pluralism has the potential to promote legal innovation, strengthen state legitimacy and promote inclusivity in governance in postcolonial societies.
Rafiq et al. (Sun,) studied this question.