Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Submit Guest Post

Constitutional amendments give Pakistan lawmakers more power

New benches will also be formed of senior judges from across the country

Constitutional amendments give Pakistan lawmakers more power
Police personnel detain Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party's supporters whilst they protest to demand the release of former prime minister Imran Khan, in Karachi on October 18, 2024. (Photo by ASIF HASSAN/AFP via Getty Images)

PAKISTAN's government narrowly passed constitutional amendments on Monday (21) giving lawmakers more power to appoint top judges, who have issued a series of recent decisions favouring opposition chief Imran Khan.

Since February elections marred by rigging allegations, relations have soured between Islamabad and the top courts as rulings litigating results have backed the party of jailed ex-prime minister Khan.


The 72-year-old former cricket star had been barred from running and his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party previously claimed the courts were used to sideline their hugely popular campaign.

Under the judicial reforms passed during an early morning session of parliament, Pakistan's chief justice will now be selected by a parliamentary committee and have a fixed term of three years.

The amendments come just days before Supreme Court chief justice Qazi Faez Isa is due to retire.

Under the previous law he would have been automatically replaced by the next most senior judge -- currently Mansoor Ali Shah, who has consistently issued verdicts deemed favourable to Khan and his party.

New benches will also be formed of senior judges from across the country to weigh exclusively on constitutional issues, at the core of disputes between the government and PTI in the Supreme Court.

"This was a deliberate attempt to undermine the independence of the judiciary," said Sardar Shahbaz Ali Khan Khosa, a senior member of the Supreme Court Bar Association.

"They attempted to strip away the core fundamental principles of Pakistan's constitution. We reject this and will fight it at every bar association," he said.

But as the bill passed, prime minister Shehbaz Sharif said it was "a historic day... affirming the supremacy of Parliament".

PTI's Omar Ayub Khan, leader of the opposition in the National Assembly, told the session that "these amendments are akin to suffocating a free judiciary".

"A government formed through rigging cannot amend the constitution," he said.

Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz party scraped together a two-thirds majority with the backing of its long-time rival turned supply and demand partner, the Pakistan People's Party.

The government clinched 225 votes of the required 224 with the crucial support of a handful of rebel MPs from PTI, state media broadcasting the session showed.

PTI, the largest bloc in parliament, had refused to back the package despite offers to water down the amendments and settle a consensus deal, analysts said.

Analyst Bilal Gilani, who heads Pakistan's leading polling agency, said the amendments have some wins –- including bringing balance to activism by the judiciary.

"A more sinister side of this amendment creates a judiciary that is more pliant with the concerns of the government," he added.

On Monday, the English-language newspaper Dawn predicted the law could heighten the confrontation between branches of state.

"Given the long-running feuds and divisions... the changes being made could trigger a new stand-off between the legal fraternity and the government," read an editorial.

Sharif heads a shaky coalition government that has the backing of the powerful military -- despite Khan's MPs winning the most seats in February's election.

In July, the Supreme Court ruled that the Election Commission of Pakistan was wrong to have sidelined Khan's party in the campaign by forcing its MPs to stand as independents over a technical violation.

It also awarded Khan's party a handful of non-elected seats reserved for women and religious minorities, which would give Khan's party the largest number of parliamentarians.

Other courts have also rolled back Khan's personal convictions or sentences.

This year, six Pakistan high court judges accused the nation's intelligence agency of intimidating and coercing them over "politically consequential" cases.

Khan remains wildly popular and continues to challenge the establishment with frequent protests, despite languishing in jail on charges he says are politically motivated.

He was ousted from power in a no-confidence vote in 2022 after analysts say he fell out of favour with the generals.

He waged a defiant campaign against the military -- a major red line in a country that has seen decades of army rule -- which was met with a severe crackdown against his leadership and supporters.

(AFP)

Add EasternEye As Your Trusted Source
preferred source on google news

More For You

Graham Norton’s Meta victory could be a turning point for victims of deepfake misinformation

The ruling is likely to be watched closely by lawyers, campaigners and victims of online harassment

Getty Images

Graham Norton’s Meta victory could be a turning point for victims of deepfake misinformation

Highlights

  • Graham Norton has won a US court order requiring Meta to reveal information about an anonymous Facebook account.
  • The broadcaster says the page spread deepfake content and false claims about his health, family and views.
  • The case highlights the growing challenge posed by AI-generated misinformation.
  • The ruling could offer hope to others struggling to identify those behind harmful online content.

Graham Norton's legal victory against Meta is attracting attention beyond the entertainment world. The broadcaster successfully obtained a court order in California requiring the social media giant to disclose information that could identify the operator of an anonymous Facebook page accused of spreading false claims and deepfake content about him.

According to court filings, the account published fabricated stories about Norton's health, his husband and even falsely claimed that his mother had died. While the case centres on a high-profile television personality, its wider significance lies in what it could mean for others facing similar online attacks.

Keep ReadingShow less