Pakistan’s political landscape shifted dramatically this week as parliament approved a sweeping constitutional amendment granting lifetime immunity to both the president and the country’s current army chief—a move that critics argue could have far-reaching consequences for democracy and judicial independence. On Thursday, November 13, 2025, lawmakers passed the 27th amendment by a two-thirds majority, setting off a cascade of reactions from across the political spectrum and raising questions about the future of civilian oversight in the nuclear-armed nation.
The new legislation, which swiftly cleared both the Senate and National Assembly before being signed into law by President Asif Ali Zardari, consolidates unprecedented military authority under a newly created Chief of Defence Forces role. According to AFP, the amendment also establishes a Federal Constitutional Court, fundamentally altering the balance of power among Pakistan’s key institutions.
At the heart of the amendment is the elevation of army chief Asim Munir, who was recently promoted to field marshal following Pakistan’s high-stakes clashes with India in May 2025. Munir now commands not only the army but also the air force and navy—an authority that extends to any officer who reaches the ranks of field marshal, marshal of the air force, or admiral of the fleet. These officers will retain their rank and privileges for life, remain in uniform indefinitely, and—perhaps most controversially—enjoy immunity from criminal proceedings.
Such protections were previously reserved only for the head of state, but the amendment now extends them to top military brass. This move has alarmed legal experts, democracy advocates, and opposition politicians alike. "This constitutional amendment will increase authoritarianism, and whatever little semblance of democracy existed in this country will fade away," warned Osama Malik, an Islamabad-based lawyer, in comments to AFP. Malik further cautioned, "It will not only remove civilian oversight from the military’s activities, it will also completely destroy the military hierarchy where all service chiefs were considered equal under the Joint Chiefs system."
The new law also shields President Zardari from criminal prosecution—at least while he remains out of other public office. Zardari, who has faced multiple graft cases in the past (though proceedings had been previously stayed), now enjoys a level of legal protection that critics say could embolden future leaders to act without accountability. However, the immunity does not apply if he or any other former president later assumes another public office, a detail that leaves a narrow window for potential future prosecution.
Opposition parties, led by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), mounted a fierce protest against the bill. Lawmakers were seen tearing up copies of the amendment in both chambers of parliament—a dramatic gesture that underscored the depth of their opposition. "This is the final nail in the coffin of an independent judiciary and a functioning democracy," declared PTI spokesman Sayed Zulfiqar Bukhari to AFP. Salman Akram Raja, PTI’s secretary general, was equally blunt: "They have given lifetime immunity from criminal prosecution to the president and created a system that concentrates power in one military office," he said, describing the amendment as "deeply undemocratic at its core."
The amendment’s reach extends far beyond the military and executive branches. One of its most contentious provisions bars courts from questioning any constitutional change “on any ground whatsoever.” This effectively places constitutional amendments beyond judicial review, a move that many see as a direct assault on the independence of Pakistan’s judiciary. Furthermore, the legislation strips the Supreme Court of its original jurisdiction over constitutional cases, transferring all pending and future constitutional petitions to the newly established Federal Constitutional Court. This new court will have exclusive authority to interpret constitutional matters, a seismic shift in Pakistan’s legal landscape.
Another clause empowers the president to transfer High Court judges on the recommendation of the Judicial Commission—a provision that critics warn could be wielded to sideline dissenting or independent-minded judges. Legal analysts have voiced concerns that this could further erode the separation of powers and undermine the judiciary’s ability to act as a check on executive and military authority.
The legislative process moved swiftly. The Senate first passed the bill on Monday, November 10, 2025. After minor revisions, the National Assembly approved it two days later, on Wednesday, November 12. The bill then returned to the Senate for final approval. Senate Chairman Yusuf Raza Gilani announced, "Sixty-four members are in favour of the passage of the bill and four members are against, so the motion is carried," as reported by AFP. The lower house, with its 336 members, also cleared the bill with the required two-thirds majority. Following parliamentary approval, President Zardari signed the amendment into law, making the changes official.
Pakistan’s history is punctuated by periods of military rule and fraught civil-military relations. The country has struggled for decades to strike a balance between its powerful armed forces and the aspirations of civilian democracy. This latest constitutional overhaul, say critics, tips the scales decisively in favor of the military, while also insulating top leaders from legal scrutiny.
Supporters of the amendment argue that the changes will bring much-needed stability and clarity to the chain of command, especially in times of crisis. They contend that granting lifetime privileges and protections to senior military officers recognizes their service and ensures continuity at the highest levels of defense. Some government allies also suggest that the Federal Constitutional Court will streamline the handling of constitutional disputes, reducing judicial bottlenecks and enhancing legal certainty.
Yet, for many Pakistanis, the speed and scope of the amendment raise troubling questions about the future of democracy and the rule of law. Critics note that by concentrating power in the hands of a few and removing key checks and balances, the amendment could pave the way for greater authoritarianism. The provision preventing courts from questioning constitutional changes is seen by some as a direct threat to judicial independence, while the ability to transfer judges could undermine the impartiality of the judiciary.
As the dust settles, Pakistan finds itself at a crossroads. The amendment’s passage has set off a national debate about the country’s direction, its commitment to democratic principles, and the delicate interplay between civilian and military power. For now, the new law stands as a testament to the shifting tides in Pakistan’s governance—a development that will be watched closely both at home and abroad.
With the 27th amendment now enshrined in law, Pakistan’s political and legal institutions face an uncertain future, one in which the balance of power has been fundamentally altered.
