Power, politics, and Pakistan’s 27th amendment 

November 10, 2025

The proposed 27th Amendment to Pakistan’s Constitution has stirred a storm of debate and concern across the country, drawing criticism from legal experts, political leaders, and civil society alike. At the heart of the controversy lies the perception that the amendment fundamentally alters the balance of power within the judiciary, potentially undermining the Supreme Court’s authority while elevating a new Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) as the apex judicial body.

The initial draft of the amendment, tabled in the Senate on Saturday, has alarmed constitutional scholars who argue that it could effectively “dethrone” the Supreme Court. According to a senior counsel who spoke anonymously to Dawn, the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction would be drastically curtailed, leaving it to handle only ordinary civil, criminal, and statutory appeals. “Left with limited jurisdiction, the Supreme Court has now become all the more a ‘Supreme District Court,’” he warned. Legal analysts fear that such a shift could allow the government to reroute appeals for key legislation, including the Elections Act of 2017, to the FCC, bypassing the Supreme Court entirely.

Former additional attorney general Tariq Mehmood Khokhar further elaborated on the amendment’s implications, highlighting its two primary objectives. First, the insertion of a new Chapter 1A is seen as a mechanism for consolidating executive control over the judiciary. By expanding powers such as the transfer of high court judges, it establishes an FCC “empowered by disempowering the Supreme Court,” he explained. Second, the amendment to Article 243 formalizes the office of the Chief of the Defence Forces in the Chief of Army Staff, guaranteeing the Field Marshal rank for life, which has drawn criticism for further centralizing authority within the military.

Political opposition has reacted swiftly and decisively. The Tehreek Tahafuz Ayeen-i-Pakistan (TTAP), a coalition of six opposition parties, announced nationwide protests in response to the amendment. TTAP leaders, including Pashtunkhawa Milli Awami Party (PkMAP) Chairman Mahmood Khan Achakzai and Majlis Wahdat-i-Muslimeen Senator Allama Raja Nasir Abbas, issued video statements calling on citizens to oppose the legislation. Abbas described the amendment as “extremely dark and extremely dangerous,” warning that it threatens the independence of democratic institutions. Achakzai echoed this sentiment, stressing that the parliament’s actions were an attack on the Constitution itself. He framed the protests as an opportunity for the people to assert their will directly, highlighting the disconnect between parliamentary maneuvers and public sentiment.

The opposition’s framing of the amendment taps into broader anxieties about democratic governance in Pakistan. Citizens and political commentators alike have expressed concerns that such a structural shift in judicial authority may erode accountability, weaken institutional checks, and concentrate power in ways that could be difficult to reverse. Legal observers caution that the Supreme Court, which has historically served as a check on executive and legislative excesses, may lose its ability to arbitrate impartially in matters of national importance.

Public response has been mixed, with social media platforms amplifying both support and criticism of the amendment. Proponents argue that the FCC could streamline judicial processes, while opponents warn that it could become a tool for political expediency, undermining years of judicial precedent and eroding trust in the rule of law.

The 27th Amendment thus represents more than a mere legislative change; it symbolizes a clash between governance, judicial independence, and civil society’s demand for accountability. As protests are planned and debates intensify, Pakistan faces a critical juncture in which the balance of constitutional power, the credibility of democratic institutions, and the nation’s legal framework are all under scrutiny. Whether the amendment will proceed, be modified, or be challenged in court remains to be seen, but its potential ramifications for Pakistan’s judicial landscape are profound and far-reaching.