This paper assesses the extent to specific post-2011 Supreme which Pakistan’s arbitration regime has shown any substantive improvement against not being a pro-enforcement regime since 2011, or whether this regime has created procedural stalling by the court against delay. Based on doctrinal research into laws, the study examines the Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Act 2011 and Court and High Court judgments to chart the enforcement process and the recurrence of tactics to resist it. According to the findings, the Pakistani courts are moving towards an increase in a Convention-consistent position, in which recognition and enforcement represent the default and merit-based re-litigation is opposed. The article conclude that Pakistan has made doctrinal progress, but procedural drag remains a bane to predictability. It is suggested that enforcement reliability be enhanced through targeted procedural changes and the systematic handling of judicial cases.