The 26th Constitutional Amendment in Pakistan has ignited significant controversy both domestically and internationally due to its potential threat to the independence of the judiciary. UN Human Rights Chief Volker Turk voiced his deep concern over the reform, stating that it was pushed through too quickly, without the necessary public consultation or debate. Turk warned that the amendment could severely undermine judicial autonomy by shifting crucial powers into the hands of parliament and the executive branch.
One of the key changes brought about by the amendment is the curtailment of the judiciary’s suo motu powers, which allowed courts to initiate cases on their own to address matters of public importance. Critics, including the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), have expressed fears that stripping courts of this power weakens their ability to check government overreach. The ICJ’s Secretary General Santiago Canton pointed out that the reforms significantly diminish the judiciary’s ability to function as an independent institution, warning that the executive could exert undue influence over judicial appointments and decisions
The amendment also introduces a highly contentious new process for appointing the Chief Justice of Pakistan. Rather than following the long-established tradition where the most senior judge is automatically appointed to the role, the new rules allow parliamentarians to select the Chief Justice from the three most senior judges. This move has raised concerns that the judiciary could become increasingly politicized, with its leadership being subject to political manipulation. Legal experts argue that this threatens the integrity of the courts, as the amendment gives the government too much influence over the judiciary’s internal functioning.
Local human rights groups and legal communities have strongly condemned the amendment. Lawyers, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, and other organizations have voiced concerns that these changes could bring the judiciary under government control, effectively undermining the balance of power in Pakistan’s political system. The opposition party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), has vowed to launch widespread protests to force the repeal of the amendment. PTI leaders claim the new provisions are a direct assault on democratic principles and judicial independence
Despite the criticism, the government has defended the reforms, presenting them as necessary steps to strengthen parliamentary oversight and restore balance between the branches of government. Proponents of the amendment argue that it enhances the role of elected representatives in judicial matters, bringing the judiciary closer to the will of the people.
Beyond the changes related to judicial appointments and powers, the amendment includes provisions that restructure key judicial processes. These include the establishment of new constitutional benches to address specific legal matters, and a more stringent evaluation system for high court judges. Additionally, the Supreme Court has been granted the authority to transfer cases to itself, further centralizing judicial power under its jurisdiction
As Pakistan moves forward with implementing the 26th Constitutional Amendment, the debate over its consequences continues to escalate. Many fear that the erosion of judicial independence could have far-reaching effects on the country’s legal system, potentially compromising the courts’ ability to safeguard human rights and hold the government accountable. With protests brewing and the legal community mobilizing against the reform, the issue is far from settled. The unfolding situation will determine whether Pakistan’s judiciary can maintain its independence amid growing political pressures.
