December 5, 2025
By Aitzaz Ibrahim
LAHORE
A three-member full bench of the Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday, took up petitions challenging the 27th Constitutional Amendment. The bench was headed by Justice Sadaqat Ali Khan, with Justice Jawad Hassan and Justice Sultan Tanveer as members. The hearing lasted only a few minutes as the bench objected to the petitions, noting that they had not been filed in line with constitutional requirements.
The court directed Advocate Azhar Siddique, counsel for petitioner Munir Ahmed, to examine Article 174 of the Constitution, which states that “the Federation can sue or be sued in the name of ‘Pakistan’, and a Province can sue or be sued in the name of ‘the Province’.” The bench held that it was therefore mandatory to make the Islamic Republic of Pakistan a party to the case.
Siddique said he could amend the petition by hand, but the bench rejected the proposal, stressing that constitutional procedure must be strictly followed.
“Since a constitutional amendment has been challenged, the proceedings must strictly comply with constitutional requirements,” Justice Sadaqat Ali Khan remarked.
The court then asked the petitioner to make the necessary amendments and adjourned the hearing.
What is the 27th Amendment?
The 27th Amendment introduces major structural changes to the Constitution, including the establishment of a Federal Constitutional Court to hear constitutional questions, cases relating to fundamental rights, and disputes between the federation and provinces.
It also empowers the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) to transfer a high court judge from one high court to another without their consent.
The amendment also abolishes the post of Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee and creates a new office of the Chief of the Defence Forces, who will simultaneously serve as the Chief of Army Staff. The amendment grants legal status to the rank of Field Marshal along with lifetime immunity from criminal proceedings and arrest. Lifetime immunity has also been extended to the President of Pakistan.
The petition challenging the amendment argues that the exemptions introduced under the 27th Amendment violate the Constitution’s preamble, curtail the Supreme Court’s powers, and undermine judicial independence. It also alleges that the amendment was passed without provincial consultation, disrupting the constitutional scheme.
Lawyers’ bodies reject amendment, vow movement
Several bar associations have rejected the amendment as an assault on judicial independence and announced plans for a 2007-style lawyers’ movement to restore the Constitution to its pre-26th Amendment form.
Since the amendment’s passage, two Supreme Court judges—Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Athar Minallah—and Lahore High Court judge Justice Shams Mehmood Mirza have resigned, saying they could not continue judicial work under the new constitutional setup.
Justice Shah called the amendment a “grave assault on the Constitution,” saying it dismantled the Supreme Court, subordinated the judiciary to the executive and struck at “the very heart of our constitutional democracy.”
Justice Minallah, in his resignation letter, lamented that the Constitution he had sworn to defend was “no more.”
International criticism
International human rights organisations have also criticised the amendment, calling it an attack on judicial independence and the rule of law.
ICJ Secretary General Santiago Canton said the changes introduced through the 27th Amendment were “alarming” and would significantly weaken the judiciary’s ability to hold the executive accountable and protect fundamental rights.
The ICJ noted that changes to Article 200 now allow the JCP to order the transfer of a high court judge, who must accept the move within 30 days or be removed from judicial duties.
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk also criticised the “hastily adopted” amendment, saying it seriously undermines judicial independence and raises grave concerns about military accountability and adherence to the rule of law.