Human rights group Amnesty International on Tuesday said the 27th Constitutional Amendment was the “crescendo of a concerted and sustained attack on the independence of the judiciary, right to fair trial and the rule of law in Pakistan”, calling for an urgent review of the legislation.
The 27th Amendment, passed by Parliament after five days of heated debate, opposition protests, and last-minute revisions, was widely criticised for abolishing judicial independence through the formation of a Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) and introducing changes to the military leadership structure by rewriting Article 243 of the Constitution (command of the armed forces).
In a statement issued on Tuesday, the rights body said the Amendment was a “crescendo of a concerted and sustained attack on the independence of the judiciary, right to fair trial and the rule of law in Pakistan”.
It called on authorities to conduct an urgent review of the Amendment to “ensure that all its provisions fully comply with Pakistan’s international human rights law obligations and commitments”.
It added the Amendment “insulates the president and heads of the naval, armed and air forces from accountability”.
“The Pakistani authorities must immediately take all appropriate measures to safeguard the impartiality, independence and safety of judges, ensuring that they can carry out their judicial functions without any inappropriate or unwarranted interference and any restrictions, improper influences, pressures and threats, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason,” the rights body said.
It noted that the Amendment violated “international human rights law, particularly undermining the independence of the judiciary, right to fair trial and justice and accountability”.
It urged Pakistani authorities to “uphold their international human rights obligations, effectively protect the human rights of everyone in the country, and ensure access to justice and effective remedies for victims, as well as respect the separation of powers and the rule of law”.
Amnesty maintained that the 27th Amendment had ensured the establishment of the FCC, which “lacks independence, erodes judges’ security“.
It noted that despite the Amendment’s “far-reaching consequences”, it was passed through Parliament with “no consultation with civil society and opposition parties”.
It recalled that on the day the Amendment was signed into law, two senior judges of the Supreme Court — Justices Mansoor Ali Shah and Athar Minallah — had resigned. It added that two days later, a Lahore High Court had also resigned, referring to ex-judge Shams Mehmood Mirza.
The rights body said the 27th Amendment “further erodes judicial independence,” which it maintained had been “already weakened” by the 26th Constitutional Amendment, which was passed in 2024. It noted that the 26th Amendment was “passed with similar haste, in less than 24 hours in October 2024”.
It added that the composition of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) — the body responsible for the appointment of judges of the Supreme and high courts — was changed under the 26th Amendment. Members of Parliament were added to the commission and judicial members were reduced to a minority, the statement said, adding that the “change in composition to include the legislature of the JCP risks politicisation” of the appointment of judges.
Amnesty noted that the 26th Amendment transferred “the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction — the authority to hear cases at its own initiation — and advisory jurisdiction and authority to provide opinion on significant questions of law or public importance referred by the president — to the newly created Constitutional Benches“.
It said that the benches had “exclusive jurisdiction for cases that dealt with the interpretation of the Constitution.”
“A little over a year after the Constitutional Benches were constituted, the twenty-seventh amendment abolished the bench at the Supreme Court level and replaced it with a separate court — the Federal Constitutional Court.”
‘Larger attacks on judiciary’
Amnesty noted that the 26th and 27th Amendments were brought “amid larger concerns regarding attacks on the judiciary”.
It noted that “in the past two years, various judges have raised concerns over interference with the judiciary as well as threats to judges deciding key cases involving the ruling coalition and military.”
The group recalled an open letter written by six judges of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) — Justices Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, Babar Sattar, Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, Arbab Muhammad Tahir and Saman Rafat Imtiaz — in March 2024.
It said that the letter, which was addressed to the then-chief justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, spoke of “intimidation by the military’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), abduction of family members of judges and surveillance in the judge’s private homes as tactics to pressurise them regarding ongoing cases, particularly those related to the former Prime Minister Imran Khan“.
Subsequent to the letter, Amnesty recalled, the case was then taken up by the SC that sought replies from the respective high courts, out of which the Peshawar High Court (PHC) responded that “interference in judicial matters by the executive was an ‘open secret’.”
In its reply, the PHC maintained that judges “faced threats from intelligence agencies while hearing ‘political’ cases. Judges are also subject to threats online and physically”.
The Amnesty statement also recalled an April 2024 incident, where various judges of the SC, as well as the high courts, received letters containing suspicious powder.
It added that in the same month, “an online campaign was launched maligning Justice Babar Sattar of the Islamabad High Court, one of the judges who had written the open letter.”
The rights body continued: “In March 2024, an anonymous complaint was filed against another author of the open letter, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, accusing him of ‘bias’ and ‘favouritism’.”
“It was subsequently not adjudicated upon by the SJC (Supreme Judicial Council).”
Amnesty recalled that another signatory to the letter — Justice Jahangiri — was removed over a case questioning the validity of his law degree in December 2025.
“Justice Jahangiri had raised concerns regarding his trial, arguing that it bypassed the procedure for removal of judges in the Constitution and that the bench hearing his case had [a] conflict of interest, as it included the [Islamabad High Court] Chief Justice Sarfraz Dogar, against whom Justice Jahangiri had filed a case at the SC challenging his eligibility as chief justice.“
More to follow.
American Dollar Exchange Rate