Judges hesitant on collective stance regarding 27th amendment: report

After the 27th Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan, Chief Justice Yahya Afridi summoned a full-court meeting on November 14 as tensions rose within the judiciary over the amendment’s extensive changes. According to reports, disagreements arose over forming a collective response, with judges divided between rejecting the law and taking a more measured approach.

During the session, judges were presented with two formal proposals: one advocating a collective resignation in protest, and another recommending issuing a joint statement affirming that the 27th Amendment was duly passed by Parliament and that any challenge must proceed before the newly established Federal Constitutional Court (FCC).

However, no consensus was reached. A majority of judges rejected the resignation proposal, while the statement was seen by some as equivalent to endorsing the amendment, a step several judges were unwilling to take.

The amendment, which swiftly passed Parliament and received presidential assent on November 13, establishes the FCC as the top constitutional court and transfers major powers away from the Supreme Court. Concerns over judicial independence were raised in letters from senior justices, including Salahuddin Panhwar, Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, and Athar Minallah, who requested a full-court review of the amendment.

Notably, the meeting took place in the Chief Justice’s chambers rather than the usual courtroom setting. The Supreme Court issued no formal comment after the meeting, citing the lack of unity among judges.

Legal circles remain sharply divided. Some view the amendment as a modernization measure, while others, including former Attorney-General Tariq Mahmood Khokhar, describe it as “an absurd nullity” that undermines the separation of powers, judicial independence, and the rule of law.

With no institutional response forthcoming, the future legal standing of the 27th Amendment and the FCC’s role remains uncertain.