The Advantages and Disadvantages of Pakistan’s 26th and 27th Constitutional Amendments – A Comprehensive Analysis

  


Pakistan’s Constitution has been amended many times since 1973 to respond to political, social, and administrative needs. Two of the important recent amendments are the 26th and 27th Constitutional Amendments, both passed to improve governance and address long-standing structural issues. However, both amendments also generated intense debate, especially the 27th Amendment, which introduced significant judicial reforms that deeply affected the balance of power between Pakistan’s institutions.

This article explains the advantages and disadvantages of both amendments,  which provide a clear understanding of their impact on Pakistan’s constitutional framework.

1. The 26th Constitutional Amendment – Overview

The 26th Constitutional Amendment was passed mainly to adjust the representation of the merged tribal districts (formerly FATA) in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly. After the 25th Amendment merged FATA into KP, it became necessary to update the Constitution so that the people of these regions could have proper representation in the provincial legislature.

Key Features of the 26th Amendment

  • Increased the number of provincial assembly seats for the newly merged tribal districts.
  • Ensured more political participation and democratic representation for residents of these districts.
  • Allowed better integration of the region into Pakistan’s mainstream political, legal, and administrative systems.

Advantages of the 26th Constitutional Amendment

1. Better Democratic Representation

The amendment gave the people of ex-FATA the right to elect more representatives to the KP Assembly. This strengthened democracy and ensured that the voices of historically neglected communities could finally reach the provincial government.

2. Integration Into Mainstream Governance

After decades of separate legal and administrative systems (such as the Frontier Crimes Regulation), merging ex-FATA into KP required constitutional adjustments. The 26th Amendment ensured that the people of these areas fully became part of the province’s political structure.

3. Strengthening Provincial Decision-Making

By adding more elected members, the KP Assembly became better positioned to address local issues such as development projects, policing, education, health, and infrastructure improvements in the merged districts.

4. Correction of Long-Term Historical Inequality

Residents of FATA had suffered from a lack of political participation for more than 70 years. The 26th Amendment played an important role in correcting this historical imbalance.


Disadvantages of the 26th Constitutional Amendment

1. Administrative and Financial Burden

Increasing the number of provincial seats meant the government had to allocate more funds for salaries, offices, development schemes, and administrative logistics.

2. Political Competition and Tensions

The sudden expansion of seats created strong electoral competition. Many experts felt that political parties were not adequately prepared for this transition in the newly merged areas.

3. Implementation Challenges

Although the amendment changed the constitutional framework, practical challenges such as policing, judicial reforms, and local government establishment remained significant obstacles.

4. Limited Impact Without Development

Some critics argued that adjusting assembly seats was not enough. Without rapid development and institutional strengthening, political representation alone could not solve the region’s deep-rooted problems.


2. The 27th Constitutional Amendment – Overview

The 27th Constitutional Amendment introduced major reforms, particularly in Pakistan’s judicial structure. The most notable change was the creation of the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), which took over many constitutional functions previously exercised by the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

Other important features included:

  • Changes in the appointment process of judges.
  • Reforms in judicial bodies like the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) and the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC).
  • New accountability rules for top officials.
  • Lifetime legal immunity for certain high-ranking military officers.

Because of these wide-ranging reforms, the amendment became one of the most debated constitutional changes in Pakistan’s history.


Advantages of the 27th Constitutional Amendment

1. A Separate Constitutional Court

Supporters argue that creating a Federal Constitutional Court will:

  • Reduce the burden on the Supreme Court.
  • Speed up constitutional case decisions.
  • Allow the Supreme Court to focus more on civil, criminal, and appellate matters.

Many countries, such as Germany and Turkey, already have separate constitutional courts for this purpose.

2. Faster Case Disposal

Pakistan’s courts face heavy backlogs. By distributing powers between the Supreme Court and FCC, cases—especially constitutional challenges—may be decided more quickly.

3. Modernization of Judicial Structure

The government argued that the amendment modernizes the judicial system by:

  • Updating judicial procedures,
  • Reforming selection mechanisms, and
  • Introducing new accountability standards.

4. Clearer Division of Judicial Work

Having constitutional cases handled by one specialized court and other cases dealt with by the Supreme Court can help in:

  • Reducing delays,
  • Improving specialization, and
  • Bringing more clarity to the judicial hierarchy.

5. Strengthening Executive-Judicial Coordination

Supporters also claim that the amendment increases coordination between branches of government, making reforms more efficient.

Disadvantages of the 27th Constitutional Amendment

While some advantages exist, the amendment also created serious concerns.

1. Weakening the Supreme Court’s Authority

Many experts believe the amendment reduces the Supreme Court’s traditional role as the highest guardian of the Constitution. These powers now shift to the newly created Federal Constitutional Court, which has no established institutional history.

2. Executive Influence Over Judicial Appointments

One of the strongest criticisms is that the amendment gives the executive branch significant control over the appointment of the FCC judges, especially in its early years. Critics fear this could:

  • Politicize the judiciary,
  • Reduce judicial independence, and
  • Undermine checks and balances.

3. Lifetime Legal Immunity

The amendment introduced lifetime immunity for certain senior military officers. Critics argue that:

  • It places some individuals above the law,
  • Reduces accountability, and
  • Weakens democratic oversight.

4. Institutional Imbalance

Several scholars believe the amendment disturbs the balance between the judiciary and the executive. By shifting powers and restructuring judicial bodies, it may concentrate too much power in the hands of the government.

5. Lack of Clear Safeguards

While the amendment creates new institutions and reforms others, many rules, procedures, and criteria for appointments are not clearly defined. This creates uncertainty and room for potential misuse.

Scholarly Reaction and Legal Challenges (Integrated Section)

The 27th Amendment generated strong reactions from Pakistan’s legal and academic community. Many senior lawyers, constitutional experts, retired judges, and even sitting Supreme Court judges expressed serious concern.

1. Concerns About Judicial Independence

Experts argue that reducing the Supreme Court’s role weakens the judiciary as an institution. Lawyer Asad Rahim Khan filed a petition in the Supreme Court, claiming the amendment violated the Constitution’s basic principles, including the separation of powers and the Court’s authority in constitutional interpretation.

2. Executive Influence in Judge Appointments

Many scholars fear that giving the executive significant control over the first appointments to the Federal Constitutional Court will make the new court vulnerable to political influence. The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) also voiced concerns about unclear selection criteria.

3. Resignation of Two Supreme Court Judges

In a historic development, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Athar Minallah resigned in protest.

  • Justice Shah called the amendment a “grave assault” on the Constitution.
  • Justice Minallah said the Constitution’s true spirit was no longer intact.

These resignations deeply impacted the legal community and showed the seriousness of the concerns.

4. Petitions in the Supreme Court and High Courts

Multiple petitions were filed to challenge the amendment. The Supreme Court petition asked the Court to strike down several sections of the law, while another petition in the Lahore High Court argued that shifting powers to the FCC and granting lifetime immunity go against constitutional principles.

5. Demand for a Full Court Hearing

Retired judges and senior lawyers requested a full-bench hearing, arguing that the amendment affects the entire constitutional structure, so only the full Supreme Court should decide on its legitimacy.

6. Overall Scholarly Assessment

Experts conclude that while the amendment aims to reform the system, it:

  • Weakens judicial independence,
  • Strengthens the executive unnecessarily,
  • Lacks detailed safeguards, and
  • Introduces accountability gaps through immunity clauses.

Conclusion

The 26th and 27th Constitutional Amendments represent two very different approaches to constitutional reform in Pakistan.

The 26th Amendment mainly focuses on improving political representation for the newly merged districts, strengthening democracy, and addressing long-standing inequalities. It is widely seen as a positive step, though it comes with implementation challenges.

The 27th Amendment, however, has sparked deep constitutional debate. While supporters believe it modernizes judicial functions, critics warn that it may weaken the Supreme Court, reduce judicial independence, increase executive influence, and create serious accountability issues.

Together, these two amendments highlight the ongoing struggle in Pakistan to balance democratic representation, judicial independence, institutional stability, and political accountability. How these amendments are interpreted and implemented in the coming years will significantly shape Pakistan’s constitutional future.

 

 

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post