Legal Pluralism in South Asia: The Sustainable Role of Customary Law in Modern Legal Systems

Authors

  • Faijul Islam Department of Law - Prime University Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.64322/JLRP.2025.2206

Keywords:

Customary governance, Indigenous jurisprudence, Legal pluralism, State legitimacy, Access to justice

Abstract

This research   explores the phenomenon of legal pluralism in the South Asian legal system with special emphasis on the continued relevance aspect and resilience of customary law within modern legal frameworks. Despite the formal establishment of state-tuned legal systems derived largely from colonial legacies and aftermath post-colonial codification, customary norms—rooted in diverse indigenous traditions with religious practices, and community eccentric adjudication which continue to shape the lived legal realities of millions across the region. So, by drawing on comparative analyses from jurisdictions in India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, and Sri Lanka basically this study evokes the complex interplay between state made law and non-state powerful orders & customs. The paper examines how customary law works both in complementing and in time of political tension with formal legal systems particularly in areas such as personal laws land tenure regardless resolution and access to justice. This paper further investigates how courts and legislatures negotiate the legitimacy and admissibility of customary norms, principles and how such negotiations are influenced by factors including identity politics, rural-urban sub divides, gender dynamics and legal reform agendas for a long time. This paper further investigates how courts and legislatures negotiate the legitimacy and admissibility of customary rituals including principles and how such negotiations are influenced by factors including identity politics, religion, rural-urban sub-divides, gender dynamics, social justice and legal reform agendas for a long time. It further highlights how customary governance and indigenous regional jurisprudence interact with formal laws how legal hybridity shapes normative authority representing pluralism and how these frameworks collectively influence state legitimacy of pluralistic society and access to justice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Mitra Sharafi, Law and Identity in Colonial South Asia: Parsi Legal Culture, 1772–1947 (CUP 2014).

2. Upendra Baxi, ‘Postcolonial Legality: A Critique’ in Rajeev Dhavan and Rajat Ray (eds), The Supreme Court under Strain (OUP 2002).

3. Werner Menski, Comparative Law in a Global Context: The Legal Systems of Asia and Africa (2nd edn, CUP 2006).

4. Anne Griffiths, In the Shadow of Marriage: Gender and Justice in an African Community (University of Chicago Press 1997).

5. Brian Tamanaha, A General Jurisprudence of Law and Society (OUP 2001).

6. HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (2nd edn, OUP 1994).

7. Franz von Benda-Beckmann, ‘Who’s Afraid of Legal Pluralism?’ (2002) 47 Journal of Legal Pluralism 37.

8. Lauren Benton, Law and Colonial Cultures: Legal Regimes in World History, 1400–1900 (CUP 2002).

9. Martin Chanock, Law, Custom and Social Order: The Colonial Experience in Malawi and Zambia (CUP 1985).

10. John Griffiths, ‘What Is Legal Pluralism?’ (1986) 24 Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 1, 3.

11. Marc Galanter, ‘Justice in Many Rooms: Courts, Private Ordering, and Indigenous Law’ (1981) 19 Journal of Legal Pluralism 1, 3.

12. Nandini Chatterjee, Land and Law in Mughal India: A Family of Landlords across Three Indian Empires (CUP 2020).

13. Lauren Benton, Law and Colonial Cultures: Legal Regimes in World History, 1400–1900 (CUP 2002).

14. Bina Agarwal, A Field of One’s Own: Gender and Land Rights in South Asia (CUP 1994).

15. Martin Lau, ‘Islamic Legal Norms and State Law in Pakistan: A Critical Analysis’ (1994) 5 Yearbook of Islamic and Middle Eastern Law 29.

16. Constitution of India 1950, arts 25–28, art 44.

17. Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act 1996, s 4(a)-(d).

18. Mohd. Zubair v State of UP AIR 1987 All 113 (All HC); see also Collector of Madura v Mootoo Ramalinga Sethupathi (1868) 12 MIA 397 (PC).

19. Gokal Chand v Parvin Kumari AIR 1952 SC 231.

20. Shayara Bano v Union of India (2017) 9 SCC 1.

21. Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005, amending Hindu Succession Act 1956, s 6.

22. Ridwanul Hoque, Judicial Activism in Bangladesh: A Golden Mean Approach (University Press Limited 2011) 137.

23. The Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961; Hindu Married Women’s Right to Separate Residence and Maintenance Act 1946; Christian Marriage Act 1872.

24. Amena Mohsin, The Politics of Nationalism: The Case of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh (University Press Limited 2002) 91.

25. The Chittagong Hill Tracts Regulation 1900 (Regulation I of 1900); see also *Raja Devasish Roy, ‘Customary Land Rights and Legal Pluralism in Bangladesh: The Case of the Chittagong Hill Tracts’ (2004) 34(4) Modern Asian Studies 745.

26. Philip Gain (ed), The Chittagong Hill Tracts: Life and Nature at Risk (SEHD 2000).

27. International Labour Organization (ILO), Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries (ILO Convention No. 169), adopted 27 June 1989, entered into force 5 September 1991.

28. Erin Moore, ‘Negotiating Justice: Legal Pluralism and Informal Justice Systems in Rural Bangladesh’ (2011) Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law 23.

29. Shahdeen Malik, ‘Access to Justice in Bangladesh: The State of the Informal Justice System’ in Asian Development Bank, Legal Empowerment for the Poor (ADB 2001) 87.

30. Naripokkho, Unjust Norms: Gender-Based Violence and Informal Justice Systems in Bangladesh (Dhaka, 2012) 35.

31. Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST) v Bangladesh (2010) 30 BLD (HCD) 194.

32. Martin Lau, The Role of Islam in the Legal System of Pakistan (Brill 2006) 97.

33. Christian Marriage Act 1872; Hindu Marriage Act 2017; Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961.

34. Mohammad Waseem, ‘Judging Jirgas: Pakistan’s Informal Justice System and Human Rights’ (2020) South Asia Journal of Law and Policy 45.

35. Constitution (Twenty-Fifth Amendment) Act 2018; FATA Interim Governance Regulation 2018.

36. Mukhtaran Mai v The State (2005) PLD 2005 FSC 25.

37. Suo Motu Case No. 1 of 2006 (2006) SCMR 1736 (SC).

38. Constitution of Pakistan 1973, arts 8–25.

39. Alternative Dispute Resolution Act 2017 (Pakistan).

40. Constitution of Nepal 2015, Preamble, arts 32, 51(j), and Schedule 8.

41. Pratikshya Kandel, ‘Customary Law in Nepal: Reconciling Indigenous Practices and Human Rights’ (2016) 5(2) Himalaya Law Review 41, 43–44.

42. Muluki Ain 1854 (General Code of Nepal).

43. International Centre for Transitional Justice, Navigating Plural Justice Systems in Nepal (ICTJ 2011) 7–10.

44. National Foundation for Development of Indigenous Nationalities Act 2002; Local Self-Governance Act 1999, s 28.

45. UNDP Nepal, Access to Justice: A Baseline Survey of Legal Aid (UNDP 2012) 18–19.

46. Flavia Agnes, Law and Gender Inequality: The Politics of Women's Rights in India (OUP 1999).

47. Sara Hossain and Lynn Welchman (eds), Honour: Crimes, Paradigms and Violence against Women (Zed Books 2005).

48. Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST) v Bangladesh [2010] HCD 38 DLR (2010) 294.

49. Asma Jahangir, ‘The Origins of Honour Killings in Pakistan’ (2002) 3 Human Rights Law

50. Suo Motu Case No. 1 of 2006 (SC Pakistan).

51. Shayara Bano v Union of India [2017] 9 SCC 1.

52. Sally Engle Merry, ‘Legal Pluralism and Transnational Legal Orders’ (2016) 4 Annual Review of Law and Social Science 377.

53. The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 (India).

54. Armin Rosencranz and Sharachchandra Lele, ‘Implementing the Forest Rights Act: Lack of Political Will?’ (2008) 43 EPW 8.

55. Amena Mohsin, The Politics of Nationalism: The Case of the CHT (University Press Limited 1997).

56. Daniel Fitzpatrick, ‘Evolution and Chaos in Property Rights Systems: The Third World Tragedy of Contested Access’ (2006) 115 Yale LJ 996.

Downloads

Published

2025-10-17

How to Cite

1.
Islam F. Legal Pluralism in South Asia: The Sustainable Role of Customary Law in Modern Legal Systems. jlrp [Internet]. 2025 Oct. 17 [cited 2026 May 13];2(2):67-88. Available from: https://www.jlrp.in/index.php/jlrp/article/view/41

Similar Articles

11-20 of 23

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.