THE ROLE OF ISLAMIC ETHICAL PRINCIPLES IN PROMOTING SOCIAL JUSTICE AND GOVERNANCE IN CONTEMPORARY PAKISTAN

Authors

  • Dr. Shakir Ullah
  • Kaneez E Zainab
  • Dr. Nazia Begum

Keywords:

Islamic ethical principles, social justice, governance, Maqasid al-Shariah, accountability, Pakistan

Abstract

This study examined the role of Islamic ethical principles in promoting social justice and enhancing governance in contemporary Pakistan. Grounded in the framework of Maqasid al-Shariah, the research focused on key ethical constructs, including adl (justice), amanah (accountability), shura (consultation), and maslahah (public welfare). A quantitative, cross-sectional research design was employed, and data were collected from 300 respondents drawn from the public sector, academia, and policy-related institutions. Using statistical techniques including correlation, regression, and structural equation modeling (SEM), the study found that Islamic ethical principles have a significant and positive impact on both social justice and governance. Furthermore, social justice was identified as a partial mediator, strengthening the relationship between ethical principles and governance outcomes. The findings highlight that effective governance is closely linked to the extent to which ethical values are institutionalized within public systems. Despite constitutional alignment with Islamic principles, practical implementation remains constrained by structural and institutional challenges. The study concludes that integrating Islamic ethical values into governance frameworks can significantly enhance transparency, accountability, and social equity. It offers important theoretical, practical, and policy implications for advancing ethical governance and sustainable development in Pakistan.

Downloads

Published

2026-04-27

How to Cite

Dr. Shakir Ullah, Kaneez E Zainab, & Dr. Nazia Begum. (2026). THE ROLE OF ISLAMIC ETHICAL PRINCIPLES IN PROMOTING SOCIAL JUSTICE AND GOVERNANCE IN CONTEMPORARY PAKISTAN. Policy Research Journal, 4(4), 696–705. Retrieved from https://policyrj.com/1/article/view/1859