A Senate session has been convened today — on a Sunday in a rare move — with a one-point agenda to deliberate on the bill for the 27th Constitutional Amendment.
The 26-page Constitution (Twenty-Seventh Amendment) Act, 2025 was tabled in the Senate yesterday amid the opposition’s outcry over the pace and scope of the proposed changes, just hours after its approval by the federal cabinet.
Addressing the upper house of the parliament, PTI Senator Ali Zafar detailed “five points” that he said formed the basic spirit of the 1973 Constitution and were now being “punctured” in the 27th Amendment.
The first, he said, was that Pakistan was a federation with autonomous provinces. Secondly, the elected parliament had authority but was bound to the Constitution. Zafar said the third point was the fundamental rights provided therein, with courts formed to protect and implement them.
Fourth pillar of the Constitution, he added, was an independent judiciary to protect people’s rights and guarantee democracy, while the fifth one was civilian supremacy.
“If you alter this balance of five pillars even slightly through any amendment, the entire Constitution will be shaken and can result in major chaos,” Zafar warned.
After presenting his arguments against the proposed legislation, Zafar urged the House to reject the bill for it and invited the treasury benches for further discussions.
“We can sit and think. There are a lot of options how to reduce the pendency of cases. We are ready to talk with you to consider amendments that will benefit the people, but we will not tolerate that you harm the public,” the PTI leader said.
Zafar stressed that the Constitution was a contract between the state and the public, with a “spirit of its own”. He added that the document was a pledge that everyone, regardless of the region they hailed from, would live according to the laws.
“When you make any change in the Constitution, it is equal to tampering with the foundation of a building, and if you make any mistake, the entire building can collapse,” he contended.
Recalling that two dictators made amendments to the 1973 Constitution that “broke it”, Zafar highlighted that even they took “a lot of time” to be passed. He added that the “real spirit” of the 1973 Constitution was restored through the 18th Amendment in 2010.
The PTI senator underscored the need for a consensus on making any changes to the Constitution, contending that consensus and a two-thirds majority were separate things. “You cannot force a Constitution through bullets.”
Arguing that the PTI represented millions of people and was rejecting the 27th Amendment, Zafar said, “Respect the mandate of the people and kindly do not vote for this amendment.”
The lawyer asserted that those bringing any constitutional amendment should be “genuinely elected”, with no personal motives or wishes to stay in power. “This parliament, in my opinion with due respect, is not authorised to pass these amendments,” he added.
Zafar also claimed that the proposed changes related to provincial shares and rights under the 18th Amendment, which were dropped in the current draft, were a “face-saving for the PPP” so certain originally intended amendments could be passed.
He said the formation of a Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) would end the judiciary’s independence, and the president having the authority to appoint the judges could result in “selection of his choice”. He added that the increase in retirement age of FCC judges from 65 to 68 years was an “incentive for judges to become pliant judges”.
The PTI lawmaker highlighted the powers given to the FCC, including considering cases related to fundamental rights, and cautioned that the court not following previous judicial precedents would result in a “collapse of the system”.
Zafar further termed the provisions related to the transfer of judges without their consent as a “hanging sword” of being moved from one high court to another. “This will bring the judiciary under the executive’s total control,” he argued.
The senator also slammed lawyers citing the reason for the formation of FCC as pendency of cases, calling them “intellectually dishonest”, and asserted that the SC pendency only amounted to two per cent of cases pending across the country.
The PTI senator recalled how the parliament “systematically” reached the 27th Amendment today, highlighting the “slow, gradual but effective erosion of democracy and the Supreme Court”.
Zafar went as far back as March 2023, when the SC had ordered that elections be held for the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab assemblies within 90 days.
He pointed out that the ruling was violated, alleging that the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) coalition and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) “colluded to make those 90 days’ government into a year and a half”.
The PTI senator then mentioned the Jan 13, 2024 verdict by a bench led by then-chief justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, which revoked the PTI’s electoral symbol a month before the general elections. He also recalled the SC’s ruling in the Article 63A case that struck down an earlier order and allowed the ballots of lawmakers who voted against party policy to be counted.
“It was as if the judiciary opened the gates for the 26th Amendment through this decision,” Zafar claimed, further alleging that the ruling coalition coerced some lawmakers to vote in 26th Amendment’s favour. The senator clarified that the PTI had never agreed to even the formation of constitutional benches, and had instead termed them “lesser of the two evils” compared to a constitutional court.
The senator then highlighted three verdicts handed by the SC’s constitutional benches — the reserved seats ruling that distributed seats earlier awarded to the PTI to the coalition partners, the order allowing the military trials of civilians, and the ruling in the judges’ transfer case to allegedly “control the Islamabad High Court”.
Senate Chairperson Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani is presiding over the session today, which began with the House remembering Allama Iqbal on his birth anniversary.
During the session, PTI lawmakers had pictures of their party founder Imran Khan placed on their desks. At the beginning of the proceedings, a PTI leader raised an objection, to which Gilani replied that as per his ruling yesterday, the senator could bring his concerns to the Senate chairman’s office.
Meanwhile, PML-N’s Pervaiz Rashid acknowledged the “relationship of respect” with Zafar, but said the PTI senator showed “his favourite side of the picture”, in which it was attempted to “turn the judiciary into a party’s tool instead of being a part of the judicial system”.
He said “some individuals had hidden a political party’s flag under the robes of judges they adorned”, appreciating Senator Hamid Khan for acknowledging controversial court judgments.
You cannot end judiciary’s independence because of past decisions: Hamid Khan
In his speech, PTI Senator Hamid Khan took exception to the manner in which the government was trying to amend the Constitution.
“Constitutional amendments are not promulgated in this manner. You first reach a consensus and then amend the constitution,” he asserted.
Khan further stated that he considered the 26th Amendment “the death of the Constitution” and the effort to promulgate the 27th Amendment was akin to an “effort to bury the Constitution”. “Both these amendments are truly something to be ashamed of.”
He went on to say that some political parties had “complaints that when the judiciary was liberated in the true sense, it issued orders to disqualify prime ministers”.
“But this does not mean that they (political parties) get personal […] They [shouldn’t try to] put an end to the same Constitution under which [the prime ministers] were disqualified, to bring about the end of that same judiciary that disqualified them,” he added.
Khan clarified that he understood that those decisions were “controversial to some extent” and he was not supporting those decisions. “But this does not mean that you end the independence of the judiciary because of judges’ past decisions. […] Both right and wrong decision are made in history, but then don’t become a reason to ban courts.”
He question that if the existing judicial system was brought to an end, “who will you go to for your fundamental rights?”.
“We are at a historical moment [at present]. And if, for any reason, […] we take a step that results in the destruction and distortion of the Constitution, all of us will have to face its consequences — those who will vote [in favour of it] and the coming generations as well,” he warned.
More to follow
American Dollar Exchange Rate