Why has Pakistan's constitutional amendment plan sparked so much controversy?

The 27 constitutional amendments - which include sweeping changes to the leadership of the armed forces, the judicial system, and Pakistan's administrative structure - have completed their legislative process after being passed by both houses of parliament, leaving only the president's signature to take effect.

The Senate approved the amendments on Nov. 10, followed by the National Assembly on Nov. 12 with some amendments, before the bill returned to the Senate and was approved by a two-thirds majority.

Despite this progress, the amendments have been widely criticized for weakening the independence of the judiciary and damaging democratic institutions.

The amendment proposes the creation of a new military position at the top of the command structure in order to integrate and unify the leadership of the armed forces, but opponents argue that the move leads to an excessive concentration of power in the hands of the military.

The bill also includes the creation of a new federal constitutional court, which opponents see as reducing the powers of the Supreme Court.

Opposition parties have expressed strong disapproval of the amendments and the speed at which they are being passed, warning that they threaten the independence of the judiciary and undermine democracy, and vowing to organize nationwide protests.

But the ruling coalition - led by the Muslim League-Nawaz and backed by the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) - used its comfortable majority in both houses to pass the amendments.

How were the amendments passed?

On November 10, the Senate ratified the 27th constitutional amendment, which is expected to reshape the legal framework governing the armed forces, change the structure of the judiciary and further centralize some powers previously held by the regions.

Pakistan's Justice Minister Azhar Nazir Tarar presented the bill to the House of Representatives, amid strong objections from opposition lawmakers who walked out in protest.

According to local reports, the Senate passed the amendments with 64 votes, including two from the opposition, representing the required majority in the 96-member chamber.

A joint parliamentary committee examined the bill on Nov. 9 and approved minor amendments before sending it to the National Assembly.

What changes are proposed in the amendment?

One of the most prominent items is the rewriting of Article 243 of the constitution, which defines the command and control structure of the armed forces.

According to Pakistani media, the amendment eliminates the position of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee and replaces it with a new position of "Chief of Defense Forces".

The Chiefs of Staff Committee is currently led by General Sahir Shamshad, who will retire on Nov. 27.

In the new system, the current commander of the army, Field Marshal Asim Munir, will become the first head of the defense forces, taking command of the combined army, air force, and navy.

The amendment also provides for the establishment of a Federal Constitutional Court to hear constitutional cases, with some of the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to be transferred to it, ostensibly to ease the backlog of cases.

The bill includes a review of the workings of the National Finance Committee, which oversees the distribution of resources among the regions.

The amendment also grants permanent immunity to the president and senior military leaders from prosecution or arrest, while allowing them to retain their titles, privileges and military uniforms for life.

Why have the amendments caused widespread concern?

Legal experts and analysts point out that these amendments could have serious implications for democracy, the independence of the judiciary and the dominance of civilian rule.

According to them, the new law tilts the balance of power more toward the military and severely limits the power of the Supreme Court by limiting its role to civil and criminal cases.

In a letter to Supreme Court President Yahya Afridi, retired judges and prominent lawyers described the amendment as "the biggest and most profound change in the structure of the Supreme Court since its founding."

Asif Yasin Malik, the former secretary general of the Defense Ministry, told the media that placing a single military officer at the head of all armed forces could upset the institutional balance and lead to serious consequences.

In a striking comment, legal expert Faiza Murad wrote on the X platform: "The goal of the 27th amendment is not reform, but to legitimize repression and eliminate the hegemony of civilian rule forever."

The opposition coalition Tahrik-e Tahrik-e Tahrir-i-Insaf - a coalition of six parties including Tahrik-e Insaf - described the project as "very dark and dangerous," warning that it "destroys the foundations of the state."

At a press conference on November 10, Tahririk-e-Insaf leaders Sheikh Imtiaz and Faiza Murad described the amendment as "theft, not reform" and accused the government of pursuing "General Ziaul Haq's authoritarian ambitions."

But Foreign Minister Isaac Dar defended the project as "historic" and said it was part of the "unfinished agenda of the 2006 Democracy Charter."

What did the media say?

Pakistani media outlets have expressed clear concern, especially about the judicial amendments, and have called on the government to build a national consensus before passing the law.

On Nov. 9, Dawn newspaper warned that the amendments "hollow out the Supreme Court," stressing the need to open a dialogue and allow all parties to express their views.

The Pakistan Observer, a newspaper close to the military, stressed on Nov. 10 that reforms of this magnitude should be implemented through national consensus rather than political haste.

The newspaper also devoted an editorial to warning of the sensitive and long-term implications of the amendment, calling on the government to handle it with extreme caution.

On Nov. 11, The News called for "a collective and inclusive dialogue to protect the spirit of the constitution and the rule of law before they are forgotten by history."

On the other hand, analysts close to the government on television programs defended the amendments, especially those related to the restructuring of the military leadership, arguing that they are in line with the requirements of modern warfare.

Defense analyst Haris Nawaz said the creation of the "Chief of Defense Forces" position represents a "significant change" that fits the nature of today's multifaceted challenges.

The new position will contribute to greater integration and coordination in the military command hierarchy, according to expert Maria Sultan.