https://journals.centeriir.org/index.php/ilhr <p class="isSelectedEnd">The <em>Journal of International Law and Human Rights</em> is a multidisciplinary scholarly Higher Education Commission, Pakistan Y category journal dedicated to promoting research, academic dialogue, and the exchange of knowledge across the social sciences. The journal provides a platform for scholars, researchers, academics, and practitioners to examine contemporary social, legal, political, economic, cultural, and human rights issues from diverse theoretical and empirical perspectives.</p> <p class="isSelectedEnd">The journal encourages original and high-quality research that contributes to a deeper understanding of complex social challenges at local, national, regional, and international levels. By bringing together perspectives from different disciplines, the journal aims to support meaningful academic discussion and contribute to the advancement of knowledge, social understanding, and informed policy discourse.</p> The Center of Innovation in Interdisciplinary Research (CIIR) en-US Journal of International Law & Human Rights 3007-0120 https://journals.centeriir.org/index.php/ilhr/article/view/190 <p style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph; line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN-US">Cross-border e-commerce transforms what would ordinarily be a routine consumer complaint into a compound problem of private international law and access to justice, insofar as the buyer, seller, platform, payment intermediary, and relevant data may each be situated in a different jurisdiction, while the quantum of the claim is typically insufficient to justify recourse to conventional litigation or international arbitration. This article develops a Pakistan-specific framework for Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) by reworking existing scholarship on alternative dispute resolution, enforcement, and e-commerce, and by situating that scholarship within legal and policy developments through September 2026. Employing doctrinal and comparative methods, the article evaluates Pakistan's fragmented regulatory architecture across electronic-transactions law, cyber regulation, provincial consumer protection, alternative dispute resolution, foreign-award enforcement, and emerging digital-governance policy, before drawing comparative design lessons from the frameworks of ASEAN, India, China, the European Union, and relevant UNCITRAL instruments. The analysis identifies five interrelated deficiencies within the existing Pakistani framework: unsettled jurisdiction over digital consumer disputes, weak statutory duties imposed upon platforms, disproportionate costs attaching to cross-border enforcement, incomplete safeguards in data governance, and persistent inequalities in digital access. On this basis, the article proposes a Digital Consumer Justice Framework, structured around a national ODR gateway, mandatory platform participation for qualifying consumer claims, a staged process of negotiation, mediation, and determination, interoperable digital-identity and evidence protocols, enforceable outcomes, human oversight of automated processes, multilingual assisted access, and reciprocal cross-border cooperation. The article's central argument is that Pakistan ought not merely to digitize its existing apparatus of alternative dispute resolution, but should instead regulate Online Dispute Resolution as a form of justice infrastructure, integrating legal validity, procedure, technology, enforcement, and consumer protection within a single, accountable system.</span></p> Amir Shabir Shazia Qureshi Shahzada Amir Mushtaq Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of International Law & Human Rights https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 2026-09-01 2026-09-01 5 7 14 33 10.59075/ilhr.v5i7.190 https://journals.centeriir.org/index.php/ilhr/article/view/186 <p>This article examines the English legal system in detail and a close analysis of the English courts' role in challenging the actions of public authorities including a detailed discussion of the extent and limitations of judicial review of public bodies in England. The judicial review is an important aspect of the rule of law, which will allow public authorities to act in a lawful and fair way.Although judicial review remains very significant in the English legal system, there are still significant spaces of ambiguity and inconsistency in the demarcation of its boundaries. This lack of clarity therefore raises concerns about the effectiveness of the mechanism and maintaining an appropriate balance between the legislative, executive and judicial branch of government.</p> <p>The article responds to three main questions: What is the state of judicial review in England today? What are the limits imposed on courts and what are the justification(s) for those limits? How do these factors impact on the effectiveness of the judicial review process overall? The approach employed in the research is qualitative and doctrinal with emphasis on primary and secondary sources of law such as case law, statutes, scholarly articles and official reports. A careful reading of these legal texts will help to guide on how many and to what extent the courts have the authority to review and challenge laws. The article will also take a look at the history of judicial review in England, and look at the reasons why it has progressed. Existing experiences in other jurisdictions will be further compared to identify possible areas of reform and development. The article will contribute to the understanding of the development of judicial review in England and the new boundaries of the rule, whilst highlighting the ongoing development and evolution of judicial review.</p> Farah Amir Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of International Law & Human Rights https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 2026-09-01 2026-09-01 5 7 01 13 10.59075/ilhr.v5i7.186