LAHORE – The ongoing debate surrounding Pakistan’s 27th Constitutional Amendment is set to intensify as a full bench of the Lahore High Court begins hearing multiple petitions challenging the new legislation. The move comes amid mounting legal and political scrutiny over the sweeping changes introduced to the country’s military and judicial framework.
The bench, headed by Justice Sadaqat Ali Khan and comprising Justices Jawad Hassan and Sultan Tanvir Ahmed, has been tasked with examining the constitutional challenges raised by various petitioners, including senior lawyers Munir Ahmad and Mian Shabbir Ismail. The petitions argue that the 27th Amendment “strikes at the very foundation of judicial independence, distorts the spirit of the 1973 Constitution, and undermines the basic structure doctrine.”
A key feature of the amendment is the establishment of a Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), a new institution tasked with interpreting constitutional matters. Critics contend that this effectively sidelines the Supreme Court, diluting its supremacy and potentially allowing political or executive influence to creep into the judicial system. Petitioners further maintain that the new system alters historical judicial balance and centralizes authority in ways that risk eroding public trust in constitutional bodies.
The amendment also introduces far-reaching structural reforms related to military command. Central among these is the redefinition of the role of Pakistan’s military leadership, granting expanded powers to top command positions, including formal oversight of all armed forces branches. Legal experts argue that this shift, along with provisions granting immunity and broadened autonomy, raises serious concerns about an imbalance of authority within the constitutional framework.
Another contested provision concerns judicial transfers. The amendment empowers the President, upon the recommendation of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan, to transfer judges between provincial High Courts. Opponents argue that such powers could indirectly lead to interference in judicial independence and weaken institutional safeguards meant to protect judges from executive pressure.
The petition filed by advocate Hassan Latif goes further, asserting that the amendment infringes on citizens’ fundamental rights and contradicts the preamble and conceptual architecture of the constitution. According to the petitioner, the reforms are both legally flawed and democratically questionable, making them vulnerable to judicial review.
Despite the backlash, government representatives maintain that the amendment modernizes Pakistan’s constitutional institutions and strengthens the framework for decision-making at the highest levels. They argue that the FCC introduces uniformity in constitutional interpretation and reflects evolving administrative needs.
As the full bench begins its deliberations, the outcome is set to shape the future of Pakistan’s constitutional order. With the judiciary, government, and legal community closely watching, the case is widely seen as a potential turning point in the country’s ongoing political and institutional evolution.
This story has been reported by PakTribune. All rights reserved.