Planned constitutional amendments in Pakistan to deepen fragile political fissures
By Noman Hossain
Pakistan is facing a significant political crisis as the government proposes amendments to the Constitution aimed at creating a new judicial structure.
These proposed changes, which include the establishment of a parallel court system, have sparked widespread debate due to their potential implications for the judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court.
The amendments suggest the creation of a new Federal Constitutional Court, which would handle petitions related specifically to the interpretation of constitutional clauses.
This could shift key responsibilities from the Supreme Court, including authority over cases involving constitutional interpretation and fundamental rights.
Critics argue that these changes might sideline the Supreme Court and consolidate power within the political executive, raising concerns about judicial independence.
One key aspect of the proposal is to extend the retirement age of judges in the new Constitutional Court to 68, compared to 65 for other judges.
The government has also proposed a three-year term limit for judges in the Constitutional Court, leading some to speculate that these changes are aimed at appointing the outgoing Chief Justice of Pakistan, Qazi Faez Isa, to a new role within the Constitutional Court once his term as Chief Justice ends.
The amendments have generated considerable opposition, particularly from the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, whose leader, Imran Khan, remains in jail. PTI members allege that the proposed changes are politically motivated and designed to remove Khan from the political arena.
Sayed Zulfi Bukhari, a PTI leader, expressed doubts about the government’s ability to pass the amendments, citing their struggle to secure the necessary two-thirds majority in Parliament.
The ruling coalition, led by the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), has so far been unable to gather the required votes for the bill’s passage. Reports suggest that the government is facing resistance from its coalition partner, the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F), which has refused to support the amendments.
Despite these setbacks, there are speculations that the government might consider alternative legislative routes, such as issuing an ordinance, to advance the reforms.
The bill also proposes to revive a controversial 2022 Supreme Court ruling that prohibits legislators from voting against their party line.
The amendments seek to overturn this ruling, allowing legislators to vote independently in Parliament. This proposal has further fueled political tensions, with both the government and opposition parties seeking to sway key votes from the JUI-F.
The debate has not been limited to the political sphere. Members of the Pakistan Bar Council have approached the Supreme Court, requesting an injunction against the proposed judicial reforms.
Their petition argues that the amendments would undermine judicial independence and violate the constitutional separation of powers.
They also assert that the judiciary’s authority to enforce fundamental rights must remain “sacrosanct” and beyond the reach of Parliament.
The implications of these constitutional changes are far-reaching and could reshape Pakistan’s legal and political landscape.
While the immediate focus is on the government’s ability to secure the necessary votes, the broader question of judicial independence and the balance of power between the executive and judiciary looms large over the debate.
As Pakistan navigates this political impasse, the outcome of the proposed amendments will have a profound impact on the country’s governance and its future political stability.
