Dear forum members,

I am 2011 aspirant and has CL as one of my optionals. I am really confused on whether I should continue with this subject or replace it. While going thru report of FPSC, I came across a reason cited as the root cause of low scoring trend. In the light of excerpts: "... Majority of candidates could not comprehend questions owing to poor understanding of basic knowledge of Constitutional Law. They even failed to distinguish between Constitution and Constitutional Law. They were unable to attempt their answers with cases references as well as judicial decision..." , can anyone eaborate me the best strategy to grab good marks in CL?

Waiting for your early response,
Abdul Rauf

I haven't opted for it but i have an answer to your question. The reason behind it, according to me, is that the papers now are based on the newspaper study. The questions are, one way or the other, connected to the newspaper, while constitutional law is about the constitutions of different countries. I think any normal person will study it from the books and rely on the book study mainly ( for c-law). But the paper-setters now ask general opinion questions which makes a person confused while answering.

__________________
If winter comes can spring be far behind

Seems like how to tackle CL is turning out to be a popular cause for all 'wannabe' officers. Any honourable subject specialist out there for our rescue?

The excerpts of FPSC report that I quoted in my original post were extracted from report of 2008. So, I think examiners are inferring to differentiate b/w Political science Paper II and Const. Law paper. But while going thru books/syllabus, a neohyte like me can't exactly differentiate b/w these two papers. The very fact that scoring trend in former subject is much better than the latter, compels one to conclude that there is some secret recipe suggesting one to treat it as a "law" subject rather than a generalistic one. But how?

Constitution is the document, the grund norm, the basic law of the state through which all the machinery/institutions of the state governs whereas Const Law is the process/ procedure of making and studying constitution. In Political Science Paper – II, we have to study selected political system and in Const. Law we study principles of Constitutional Law.

Reason of low score is, candidates attempt the paper on the style of political system like that of Political Science Paper – II, questions should be attempted according to Const. Law, like mentioning articles in aswer, citation of constitutional cases, citation of court cases lake marbury vs Madison in US, Molvi Tamiz-ud-Din case in Pakistan. When you will attempt in this style hope you will score well.

Apart from above mentioned analysis scoring trend also play a vital role in this regard. Const. Law was not scoring in 2009. In past people scored 80+, general views are that the subject is considered low scoring when it is opted by majority of the people, lack of availability of standard books in markets, and candidates’ failure to grasp the questions and to the point answer.

Moreover, those who opted constitutional law should also remain in touch with recent developments and updates. Like now the highest court of appeal in UK is Supreme Court not House of Lords, there are many other drastic changes in constitutions of the countries with the passage of time and one should not rely solely on books.

__________________
No matter how fast i run or how far i go it wont escape me, pain, misery, emptiness.

Thank you crown prince for your detailed response. I really appreciate it.

I am afraid, difference between study of "political system" and "principles of constitutional law" is not clear yet. Naivety is regretted here.

Very good point, i must say. But dont you think that it's applicable only when questions demand it. For example Marbury vs. Madison can only be quoted while justifying / tracing history of judicial review or jurisdiction of supreme court over parliamentary statutes and Molvi Tamizuddin's case when one has to elaborate the history of undermining democratic institutions by illegal dissolutions of assemblies as a result of intrigues of the executive (read Establishment) hand in glove with upper judiciary by invoking the notorious "doctrine of necessity".

I mean, how can one quote legal cases when straightforward questions are asked. For example, "Compare and contrast the powers of the President of the USA with those of the British Prime Minister"; "Discuss the powers, structures and functions of Lok Sabha under the constitution of India".... In short, I think there are very few ocassions when such questions are asked where the famous legal cases can be quoted.

Hope all this doesn't sound like a digression to you.

@ crown prince u pointed out very rightly that ppl use to deal contitutional law according to pol.sc. there is difrence between them.
in pol sc. u deal contitution as scientist n social analyst but in contitutional law u deal it as jurist.

Political sc.is the study of every aspect of political life of a society n state
constitutional law is one part of political sci.which deals with the working n the machenary of governance of the state

In pol sc. u read constitutions how they r n in constitutional law deals how contitution should be wat how can be amended how to be formed etc.
now coming to diffrence of constitution and constitutional law
constituion is set of laws use to govern the state or supreme law of land is constitution.

Constitutional law relates to the study, practice, interpretation and administration of laws set forth by a country’s constitution. In the US, for example, the US Constitution is the basis for all constitutional law. Any legal subjects that deal with constitutional rights or violations are a part of constitutional law.

Experts in constitutional law may participate in cases that seem to be in clear violation of the constitution. Additionally, constitutional law experts may also participate in lobbying to change or amend existing laws if they seem to conflict with a nation’s views. Generally cases involving US constitutional law are heard by the US Supreme Court. They then write opinions or judgments based on their interpretation of the law.

__________________
Don't miss the magic of the moment by focusing on whats to come.