Senior lawyers have strongly opposed the proposed constitutional amendment package and have urged Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa to distance himself from the controversy.
In a statement issued on Sunday, advocates Muneer A. Malik and Faisal Siddiqi called for CJP Isa to gracefully retire on October 25, 2024, asserting that Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah should rightfully assume the position of Chief Justice on October 26. They also advised CJP Isa against accepting any nomination for appointments to a proposed constitutional court or bench. They criticized the government’s move as an unprecedented assault on the Constitution and the judiciary through a dubious amendment package, arguing that such changes should not be made by a parliament lacking national legitimacy. They urged the legal community and judiciary to resist and reject these amendments.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Shehzad Shaukat expressed concern over the government’s secrecy regarding the constitutional package and its failure to present it for proper discussion, leading to nationwide speculation. He indicated that the SCBA might support the amendment if it pertains solely to establishing a constitutional court to address delays in adjudicating common people’s cases, noting that even PTI leader Imran Khan and JUI-F emir Maulana Fazlur Rehman had previously supported the creation of such a court in the 2006 Charter of Democracy.
However, Shaukat stated that resistance would occur if the amendment involved increasing the retirement age of judges or included person-specific changes, as the Supreme Court has previously invalidated such legislation.
Senior lawyer Khurram Chughtai criticized the government’s handling of the amendment process, comparing it unfavorably to the thorough discussion that preceded the 18th Amendment. He lamented that the current government is making “non-serious” efforts to introduce a constitutional package without adequate discussion in parliamentary committees and other forums, particularly when the parliament is incomplete due to election disputes and issues with reserved seats.
Lawyer Asad Jamal argued that if the same “incomplete” parliament could conduct elections for the highest constitutional office, then there should be no issue with passing the amendment through the same house. He noted that many of the critics had previously supported CJP Isa against the unconstitutional presidential reference filed against him.
