In a significant political development, Pakistan’s National Assembly passed the 26th Constitution Amendment Bill early Monday, limiting the tenure of the country’s Chief Justice to a three-year term. The move has stirred debate across the country, with strong reactions from legal experts and political observers. The bill, which received widespread attention, was passed after an overnight session in parliament.
The bill garnered the support of 225 members of the 336-member National Assembly, surpassing the required threshold of 224 votes. According to Dawn, the National Assembly’s approval follows the Senate’s decisive vote on Sunday, where the amendment passed with a 65-4 majority. The ruling coalition needed at least 64 votes in the Senate to secure the bill’s passage.
Now, with approval from both legislative chambers, the bill will be forwarded to Pakistan’s President for formal assent as per Article 75 of the Constitution. Geo News reports that this final step is a procedural formality before the law officially comes into effect.
The bill, which includes 22 clauses of amendments, was presented by Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar. It proposes the establishment of a 12-member commission responsible for appointing the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) for a fixed three-year term. Previously, there was no specific tenure for the Chief Justice, who could serve until the age of retirement.
Political Support and Passage in the Senate
The bill’s passage in the Senate marked a crucial moment in the legislative process. Key to its success was the support from the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) and the Balochistan National Party-Mengal (BNP-M). Despite the BNP-M party’s official stance to abstain from voting, two of its lawmakers broke ranks and voted in favor of the bill. Their support, along with that of five JUI-F senators, allowed the government to achieve the two-thirds majority needed in the upper house.
Consensus and Cabinet Approval
The bill’s approval by the cabinet on Sunday followed extensive consultations among Pakistan’s ruling coalition partners. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif led a meeting where a consensus was reached, paving the way for the constitutional amendment to move forward. The cabinet, during the meeting, approved the draft of the bill, emphasizing that it was in the “wider interest of the country,” as stated by the Prime Minister’s Office.
Ahead of the cabinet meeting, Prime Minister Sharif met with Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) co-chairman and former President Asif Ali Zardari to discuss the proposed amendments in detail. The discussions focused on ensuring that the bill aligned with the coalition government’s goals of national development and public welfare.
New Judicial Appointment Body
Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar, in a press conference held before the Senate session, explained the rationale behind the proposed changes. He highlighted the creation of a new commission tasked with appointing judges, including the Chief Justice.
More Read
Under the new structure, the commission will consist of the Chief Justice of Pakistan, four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, two senators, and two members of the National Assembly (MNAs)—one of each being from the opposition. This revised process is intended to create a more transparent and balanced approach to judicial appointments.
The law minister further noted that before the 18th Constitutional Amendment, judges were appointed directly by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister. The introduction of the commission reflects efforts to decentralize the process and make it more inclusive. According to Tarar, the changes aim to expedite justice delivery by the country’s top court, addressing concerns about delays in the judicial system.
Reactions and Future Implications
The passage of the 26th Constitution Amendment Bill has sparked widespread discussion in Pakistan. While supporters argue that the bill will enhance accountability and improve the judicial system, critics claim that it could undermine the independence of the judiciary. Legal experts are divided on the potential long-term impact, with some fearing that the fixed tenure for the Chief Justice could lead to increased political interference in the judiciary.
As the bill awaits the President’s assent, all eyes are on the broader political and legal ramifications of this landmark constitutional change. The government has portrayed the amendment as a step toward greater efficiency and transparency in the judiciary, but its critics remain skeptical about how the reforms will unfold in practice.
