The political landscape in Pakistan has been thrown into turmoil following the passage of the 27th Constitutional Amendment, a sweeping set of changes that critics argue severely undermines judicial independence, strengthens the military’s grip on power, and rolls back hard-won provincial autonomy. The controversy has galvanized opposition parties, civil society, and legal experts, all of whom are voicing deep concerns about the future of democracy in the country.
On November 19, 2025, the Lahore High Court (LHC) scheduled a hearing for December 5 to address multiple petitions challenging the amendment. According to Dawn, a three-member bench led by Justice Sadaqat Ali Khan will preside, with Justices Jawad Hassan and Sultan Tanveer also on the panel. The petitioners, naming both the prime minister and the National Assembly speaker as respondents, argue that the amendment strips the Supreme Court of its original jurisdiction, effectively reducing it to a “federal constitutional court.” They maintain this represents a direct threat to judicial autonomy and contradicts both Islamic provisions and fundamental rights.
“The constitutional framework has been disturbed because the amendment was passed without proper consultation with the provinces,” the petitions claim. They call for the court to strike down the 27th Amendment and to suspend its implementation until a final judgment is delivered.
The amendment’s passage has sparked a wave of protests across Pakistan. The Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province has denounced it as “unconstitutional” and a “conspiracy against the Islamic Constitution,” as reported by The Express Tribune. During a provincial executive committee meeting in Peshawar, JUI-F’s General Secretary Senator Maulana Attaul Haq Dervish acknowledged that the amendment had followed legal procedures but insisted that its content was fundamentally flawed. Provincial Ameer Senator Maulana Attaur Rehman went further, alleging that the amendment was passed “under pressure” and that previously eliminated provisions had been reinstated.
The JUI-F’s stance is far from isolated. Several political parties have taken to the streets in protest. On November 18, the joint opposition alliance Tehreek Tahaffuz-e-Ayeen-Pakistan (TTAP) led a rally from Parliament House to the Supreme Court in Islamabad, highlighting what they described as ongoing constitutional violations. TTAP leaders announced a nationwide ‘Black Day’ protest for November 21, underscoring the depth of opposition to the amendment. “We walked from parliament to the Supreme Court to highlight how all avenues of justice have been closed for the people of Pakistan,” TTAP’s Allama Raja Nasir Abbas told Geo News. He added, “People have been silenced, fundamental human rights are being violated, and we will not remain quiet as long as we live.”
Other parties have joined the chorus of dissent. On November 17, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Members of Provincial Assembly marched from the Punjab Assembly to Charing Cross, holding placards that declared, “We reject 27th Constitutional Amendment.” PTI’s secretary-general Salman Akram Raja addressed the crowd, stating, “The judiciary has been targeted and a subservient judiciary cannot serve the interests of the oppressed and have-nots,” as reported by Dawn.
The Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) and its women’s wing Sindhiyani Tehreek also organized protests on November 16, decrying not only the amendment but also issues such as corporate farming, new canals on the Indus River, honor killings, and the exploitation of Sindh’s resources. PAT President Vasand Thari called the amendment “worse than the post-hybrid system and an attack on democracy.”
So, what exactly does the 27th Amendment entail, and why has it sparked such a firestorm? According to a detailed analysis by OneIndia, the amendment, passed by both houses of Parliament and signed into law by President Asif Ali Zardari on November 13, fundamentally alters the balance of power in Pakistan. It weakens the judiciary by replacing the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction with a new Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) that holds overriding authority. This FCC will have exclusive power over constitutional interpretation, inter-governmental disputes, and cases previously handled by the High Courts, including all election disputes. Critics fear this will make it easier for those in power to rig polls and handpick favorable judges.
The amendment also grants sweeping new powers to the Chief of Army Staff, General Asim Munir. Changes to Article 243 make the Army Chief the commander of all Defence Forces, with lifetime immunity from prosecution for five-star ranks. General Munir was promoted to Field Marshal soon after India’s Operation Sindoor in May 2025—a retaliatory strike following the Pahalgam attack by Pakistan-sponsored terrorists. This move, critics say, consolidates military dominance at the expense of civilian oversight.
What’s particularly striking about the current situation is the support the amendment received from major political parties, notably the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) and the Pakistan Peoples Party. As Dawn observed, “This is not the first instance when the powers that be have sought to subjugate the judiciary, but it is the first time a civilian dispensation has so extensively facilitated the effort.” Only Imran Khan’s PTI has maintained a firm line of opposition within the parliamentary arena.
For many, the 27th Amendment represents a dramatic reversal of the progress made under the 18th Amendment in 2010, which aimed to decentralize power, empower provinces, and restore parliamentary supremacy. That earlier reform was seen as a crucial step toward civilian rule and the reduction of the military’s monopoly over national affairs. Now, with the 27th Amendment, those gains appear to be slipping away.
Pakistani senator Raza Rabbani, a key architect of the 18th Amendment, has warned that the new changes are designed to “revoke provincial rights.” The amendment also allows the President to transfer High Court judges across provinces—a significant departure from established practice. Judges who decline such transfers face forced retirement, further undermining judicial independence.
The historical context is hard to ignore. Pakistan’s civil-military relations have long been fraught, with the military repeatedly intervening in governance and undermining civilian institutions. From General Ayub Khan’s martial law in 1958 to General Zia-ul-Haq’s radicalization of governance and General Pervez Musharraf’s constitutional manipulations in the early 2000s, the pendulum has swung between military and civilian rule. The 18th Amendment was a rare moment of hope, but the 27th signals a return to centralization and military dominance.
As Dr. Sharma, an assistant professor with expertise in South Asian politics, put it, “A fragmented judiciary and absolute commanding powers to the Army Chief make an unprecedented and dangerous cocktail, if Pakistan wants to survive as a parliamentary democracy, of which there are little chances now.” The new Chief of Defence Forces position replaces the symbolic Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, placing all three services under General Munir’s direct command—an arrangement that marks a significant shift in Pakistan’s power structure.
With protests mounting, legal challenges underway, and the country’s democratic institutions under strain, Pakistan stands at a crossroads. The coming weeks will reveal whether the courts, the opposition, or civil society can halt or reverse what many see as a profound assault on the nation’s constitutional order.
