Recently, debates regarding the potential 27th Amendment in Pakistan have intensified, with government officials and opposition parties weighing in on its implications. Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar has stated that there is no immediate intention to propose new legislation. However, speculation persists, especially following Prime Minister’s Adviser on Law Barrister Aqeel Malik's comments on the government’s potential to present an amendment if consensus is reached. This article delves into the recent developments and diverse perspectives surrounding the 27th Amendment proposal.
The ruling coalition partner, the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), and opposition parties, including the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and the Jamiat Ulema Islam (JUI-F), have raised concerns about another amendment that could modify the Supreme Court’s Practice and Procedure Act. Mr. Tarar noted that the government’s current focus is on implementing the 26th Amendment, which recently redefined the process for appointing Supreme Court Judges and the Chief Justice of Pakistan. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and PPP chairperson Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari discussed the amendment recently, possibly signaling a shift in the government's stance on this issue.
PPP has strongly indicated its opposition to any new constitutional changes, particularly those that could alter judicial powers. Similarly, JUI-F leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman emphasized that his party will not endorse any clauses that were previously excluded in the 26th Amendment. Maulana also hinted that his party might resort to public demonstrations to oppose the proposed amendment.
Sources have revealed that the government is contemplating changes within the judicial system, aiming to reform local government structures and address previously overlooked issues. However, Mr. Tarar and Rana Sanaullah, a senior leader from the ruling PML-N, clarified that any amendment would only proceed with cross-party consensus, ensuring that controversial clauses are not reintroduced unilaterally. As debates grow, legal experts and civil society have voiced their reservations, concerned about potential government interference in the judiciary’s independence.
In Karachi, prominent lawyers and human rights advocates voiced concerns about the amendment’s implications for judicial independence, labeling it a step toward “controlled democracy.” Senior legal figures, such as former SCBA president Munir A. Malik, cautioned that the amendment could lead to a judiciary influenced by political interests, diminishing public trust in judicial proceedings. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) has echoed similar fears, questioning the possible erosion of judicial autonomy.
The proposed 27th Amendment has sparked a debate that underscores the tension between the legislative and judicial branches of Pakistan. The discussions about judicial reforms continue, with stakeholders across the political and legal spectrum assessing the potential impacts. In conclusion, the final decision on this amendment will require careful consideration to balance judicial independence with effective governance reforms, ensuring that any change serves the country’s broader democratic objectives.
