ISLAMABAD: Islamabad Policy Institute on Friday called for transparency and public consultation in the 26th Constitutional Amendment process to ensure broad consensus.
The recommendations prepared by the think tank after discussion with lawyers emphasized the need for preserving judicial independence by preventing political interference in judicial appointments and decision-making.
Instead of creating a new Constitutional Court, IPI recommended strengthening the Supreme Court’s capacity for constitutional interpretation.
The think tank further stressed the protection of human rights, especially against overreach under national security provisions, and urged for reinforcing democratic institutions to maintain a balance of power between the executive, judiciary, and legislature.
Human rights activist and lawyer Jibran Nasir criticized the ruling coalition’s push for the 26th Constitutional Amendment, highlighting the lack of transparency and the risk it poses to the trichotomy of powers in the country.
He noted that the debate has been overly focused on personalities rather than the broader constitutional impact.
Nasir argued that a more prudent approach would be to establish a Constitutional bench in the Supreme Court under its chief justice rather than creating a new Federal Constitutional Court, which could lead to chaos and inconsistency in legal interpretation.
He warned that the proposed court would allow inexperienced or politically connected appointees, undermining judicial independence. Nasir also expressed concern about the erosion of credibility of civilian institutions and the judiciary, which perpetuates the influence of undemocratic forces.
Nasir further pointed out the lack of unity within the legal community, making it difficult to mount collective opposition to the amendment.
Lawyer Rida Hosain decried the secretive handling of the 26th Constitutional Amendment, noting a lack of transparency and consultation, unlike the 18th Amendment process. She highlighted the absence of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s representation in the Senate and warned that the amendment could weaken judicial independence by allowing transfers of judges without consent and through limiting court powers on the pretext of national security.
She emphasized that national security provision restricting the cases that could be heard by the higher judiciary conflicts with human rights.
Hosain further argued that the amendment distorts the Charter of Democracy’s original intent, which aimed to strengthen the judiciary and urged the Supreme Court to review the amendment, given its far-reaching consequences.
Lawyer Asad Rahim Khan criticized the 26th Constitutional Amendment, describing it as a severe attack on the Constitution and judicial independence. He argued that it would strip the Supreme Court of its primary role of constitutional interpretation and reduce it to handling other matters, while a new Federal Constitutional Court would be created, with its chief justice handpicked by the prime minister. This, he argued, undermines the progress made in ensuring independent judicial appointments.
He described the proposed FCC as an entity designed to be controlled by the executive and foreign to Pakistan’s common law system.
Rahim also highlighted that high court judges could be transferred between provinces like bureaucrats, weakening judicial integrity. He warned that the amendment erodes judicial independence and would harm ordinary citizens by weakening protections for fundamental rights.