This past week marked a dark chapter in Pakistan’s constitutional history. Parliament ratified the 27th Constitutional Amendment, triggering an institutional earthquake. The immediate fallout is telling: two eminent Supreme Court justices, Mansoor Ali Shah and Athar Minallah, tendered their resignations in protest, branding the amendment a “grave assault” on the nation’s foundational document.
As the new Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) is inaugurated with Justice Aminuddin Khan as its first Chief Justice, the opposition alliance has announced countrywide protests. This is not mere political wrangling; it is a fundamental re-engineering of the state that eviscerates judicial independence and constitutionalises a privileged class above the law.
The government, wielding its controversial two-thirds majority (bolstered by a Supreme Court ruling on reserved seats), executed this transformation with chilling efficiency. Law Minister Azam Nazir Tarar presented the Bill on 8 November 2025; it was rammed through the Senate and National Assembly by 12 November amid an opposition boycott and outcry from civil society over the lack of due deliberation. Such haste regarding a profound constitutional change speaks volumes about its intent: to avoid democratic scrutiny and silence dissent.
The heart of this constitutional coup lies in its systematic reconfiguration of the judiciary. The creation of the FCC is not a benign administrative reform; it crushes the Supreme Court’s authority, stripping it of its jurisdiction over constitutional matters and vesting it in a new, parallel court. As Justice Mansoor Shah warned in his open letter, the FCC is a “political device to weaken and control the judiciary”.
It is argued, inter alia, that the creation of the FCC will enhance judicial efficiency by allowing the Supreme Court to focus on reducing the backlog of ordinary (non-constitutional) cases. But the highest pendency is at the district court level, with only a tiny fraction lying before the Supreme Court. Any genuine reform should focus on the quick disposal of cases in the district courts. In common law countries, the highest courts decide all types of cases, including constitutional matters.
The 27th Amendment is not a step forward for the stability and well-being of Pakistan. Rather, it is a giant leap backwards into a constitutional abyss, where executive power is essentially unchecked and justice is politically subservient
Even if it is stated, for the sake of argument (without conceding), that the FCC was/is a must, then the judges should have been appointed through a fully independent judicial commission. After all, an independent judiciary is a pillar of constitutional democracy. Yet, under the 27th Amendment, the judges of the FCC are appointed by the President solely on the advice of the Prime Minister, without any consultation with the Judicial Commission of Pakistan.
How can judges appointed in such a manner be expected to review independently and impartially acts of the Legislature and the Executive that appointed them? Further, FCC judgments will be binding on the Supreme Court and High Courts despite this questionable FCC appointment process. Will it not diminish the rule of law, good governance, democracy, constitutionalism, and therein the strength of the state itself?
Further, power has been granted to the President to transfer High Court judges without their consent. A judge’s refusal can trigger proceedings for misconduct and forced retirement. Will this not breed fear and insecurity in our High Court judges, transforming an independent judiciary into an extension of our national executive branch? Will it not eliminate independent judges and stifle dissent?
The grant of lifetime immunity from prosecution to five-star ranking military officers, as well as the President of Pakistan, is another problematic dimension of the Amendment. Those who serve the nation deserve the highest prestige and esteem, but this move, unprecedented in Islamic history, places certain individuals permanently above the law. How can such immunity be granted even to our national heroes and leaders in an Islamic Republic? There could be other lifetime privileges and honours to bestow on our greatest heroes and national leaders that do not undercut our appreciation for the rule of law.
This amendment cements the entrenchment of an elitist model of government that undercuts equal citizenship before a constitution interpreted by independent judges. In short, it is anti-democratic. It is the culmination of a trend that seeks to erode the separation of powers and squeeze dissent, even in the broader interest of the state itself. Placing overwhelming power in the hands of the executive, while systematically weakening every potential check and balance, the judiciary and the opposition, the amendment does not solve a governance crisis. It accelerates that crisis. Such an amendment may serve a short-term interest, that is, political expediency, but it will undoubtedly cause long-term damage to our national security and our justice system, and thus our economy and, ultimately, our democracy.
The constitutional debate must now move to the public and whatever judicial forums remain intact. The legal fraternity, civil society, and all institutions and political forces must unite to forestall this crisis. Future constitutional reform must emerge from genuine political and institutional will and multi-stakeholder dialogue in our national interest.
In my opinion, the 27th Amendment is not a step forward for the stability and well-being of Pakistan. Rather, it is a giant leap backwards into a constitutional abyss, where executive power is essentially unchecked and justice is politically subservient. After the 27th Amendment, the soul of Pakistan’s constitutional democracy is dead.