_28.2_KHAN_ARTICLE 4(DO NOT DELETE) 2/23/20158:15PM 284GENESIS AND EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN: TOWARD A DYNAMIC THEORY OF JUDICIALIZATION Maryam S. KhanI.INTRODUCTIONJudicial activism in South Asia, as well as the unique form of pro-poor litigation known as ―public interest litigation‖ (PIL) on which much of it rests, has received considerable attention in recent years from both South Asian and foreign scholars.The concept of public interest law or PIL is not novel and is often instinctively traced back to the PIL phenomenon of the 1960s in the United States.In recent decades, the American practice has been a notional counterpart of public interest in courts in other constitutional systems. However, the South Asian incarnation of PIL is, in many ways, distinguishable from the Anglo-American experience. Upendra Baxi‘s early critique of the Indian Supreme Court‘s activism in the mid-1980s is the classic statement of the distinctiveness of the Indian genre of PIL.Baxi uses the term ―social action litigation‖ (SAL) to emphasize the very different historical triggers, institutional settings, and conceptual groundings of PIL in the Indian context.The *Oscar R. Ruebhausen South Asia Yale Fellow (Yale Law School), 2010. An earlier draft of this article was presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS), 2014, and at the Harvard Institute for Global Law and Policy (IGLP) Workshop in Doha, Qatar, 2014. My deep appreciation to Sudha Setty and Anil Kalhan for their fervent interest in my research and for providing me the opportunity to present through proxy at the AALS due to my inability to personally attend the Annual Meeting. My gratitude also to faculty and colleagues at the IGLP workshop, particularly Intisar A. Rabb, Melissa Crouch, and Daniel Vargas for their incisive comments, to Anjum Nasim, Mohammad Waseem, Osama Siddique, Ali Cheema, and Syed Ali Murtaza for their unwavering encouragement, support, and inspiration through the course of my research, and to Madhay Khosla for his positive reinforcement of my work. I must also especially express my intellectual debt to Nick Robinson for many hours of animated discussions on the subject of judicial politics in India and Pakistan and his generous and unblunted feedback on my ideas as they unfolded. Last but not least, a word of thanks to my able and ever patient research associates, Marva Khan and Sara Jamil, whose diligence, commitment, and cheerfulness made this research project all the more pleasurable. 1.See, e.g., Shyami Fernando Puvimanasinghe, Towards a Jurisprudence of Sustainable Development in South Asia: Litigation in the Public Interest, 10 SUSTAINABLE DEV.L.&POL‘Y41, 41 (2009) (explaining how impoverished and lower class citizens are able to gain access to the judicial system through PIL).