Dosso v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 1958 SC 533): The Birth of the Doctrine of Necessity

Table of Contents

🏛️ Introduction

The case of Dosso v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 1958 SC 533) is one of the most important decisions in Pakistan’s legal history. It changed the country’s constitutional structure and gave birth to the Doctrine of Necessity — a principle that allowed extra-constitutional acts to be considered valid under special situations.

This case is studied in every law school and remains central to constitutional law in Pakistan. It explained how political changes could affect the legal system and raised deep questions about judicial independence.

Dosso v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 1958 SC 533) was a landmark case in Pakistan’s constitutional history.
Learn more on Wikipedia.

📚 Background of Dosso v. Federation of Pakistan

To understand the case, it’s important to know what happened before it.

Pakistan’s first Constitution was made in 1956.
In October 1958, President Iskander Mirza abrogated (cancelled) that Constitution.
He imposed Martial Law and gave control of the country to the Army Chief, General Muhammad Ayub Khan.

This sudden step shocked everyone. The question before the Supreme Court was:
➡️ Was this Martial Law legal or unconstitutional?

⚖️ Facts of the Case

Petitioner: Dosso, a member of the Loralai tribe in Balochistan.
Law in question: The Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) — a colonial-era law applied in tribal areas.
Context: Dosso was convicted under FCR rules. He challenged the law as unconstitutional under the 1956 Constitution, arguing it violated his fundamental rights.
While his case was pending, the 1956 Constitution was abolished, and Martial Law was declared.

The main issue now became not just Dosso’s personal rights, but whether the new martial law regime itself had legal authority.

❓ Issues Raised Before the Court

The Supreme Court of Pakistan was asked to decide:

Whether the abrogation of the 1956 Constitution by President Iskander Mirza was legal.
Whether the Laws (Continuance in Force) Order 1958, issued by the new regime, was valid.
Whether Martial Law could be accepted under international legal principles.
Whether Dosso’s rights under the old Constitution still existed.

⚖️ Judgment of the Supreme Court

The judgment was delivered by Chief Justice Muhammad Munir in 1958.
The Court upheld the Martial Law and gave legal recognition to the new government.

The Supreme Court used the Hans Kelsen theory of revolutionary legality — an international legal concept that says:

“If a revolution or successful coup changes the basic legal order, and the new regime gains effective control, it becomes the new lawful authority.”

According to this view:

The 1956 Constitution had been completely replaced.
The new regime led by General Ayub Khan was a “revolutionary government.”
Therefore, all its actions were considered legally valid.

As a result:

Dosso’s petition failed.
The FCR law remained valid under the new order.
Martial Law was declared constitutional, based on the success of the revolution.

🧠 Legal Principle Established (Doctrine of Necessity)

This case created what is known today as the Doctrine of Necessity in Pakistan.

🔹 Key Principles:

A successful revolution or coup d’état can create a new legal order.
Once that new order is accepted by the people and state institutions, it becomes legitimate.
Courts can recognize such regimes to maintain stability and order, even if they came through unconstitutional means.

This doctrine became a powerful legal precedent for later constitutional crises in Pakistan.

According to PLD 1958 SC 533, the court relied on constitutional principles later accessible through
PakistanLawSite.

🌍 Impact and Importance of the Case

The Dosso case had deep and long-lasting effects on Pakistan’s judicial and political systems.

🔹 Positive Effects:

It gave the Court a legal way to explain sudden political changes.
It tried to protect citizens’ rights under new regimes by keeping laws “continuing in force.”

🔹 Negative Effects:

It weakened democracy by justifying military takeovers.
It allowed future martial laws (like in 1969 and 1977) to claim legality.
It damaged the independence of the judiciary for years.

Later, the Supreme Court itself rejected this approach in the Asma Jilani v. Government of Punjab (PLD 1972 SC 139) case.
That case declared General Yahya Khan’s Martial Law illegal and criticized Chief Justice Munir’s reasoning in Dosso.

⚖️ Key Takeaways from Dosso v. Federation of Pakistan

Citation: PLD 1958 SC 533
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
Chief Justice: Muhammad Munir
Legal Doctrine: Doctrine of Necessity
Outcome: Martial Law declared valid
Later Status: Overruled by Asma Jilani v. Government of Punjab (1972)

🔹 Why It’s Important to Study:

It shows how courts handle political pressure.
It teaches the limits of judicial interpretation.
It reminds us why constitutional supremacy must be protected.

🧩 Related Case Laws

Asma Jilani v. Government of Punjab (PLD 1972 SC 139) – Overruled the Dosso doctrine.
Begum Nusrat Bhutto v. Chief of Army Staff (PLD 1977 SC 657) – Reapplied the Doctrine of Necessity after a new coup.
Zafar Ali Shah v. General Pervez Musharraf (PLD 2000 SC 869) – Again relied on necessity during Musharraf’s takeover.

🏁 Conclusion

The Dosso v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 1958 SC 533) case remains a turning point in Pakistan’s constitutional history.
It marked the first time the judiciary validated military rule, changing the path of Pakistan’s democracy.

Although later judgments rejected its reasoning, the Dosso case still stands as a warning about how courts can shape or shake the future of a nation.

It is a must-read case for every law student, lawyer, and citizen who wants to understand how legal doctrines can protect or endanger democracy in Pakistan.

You can read similar Supreme Court rulings on the
Official Supreme Court of Pakistan judgments portal.