The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the UN Human Rights Chief have strongly condemned Pakistan’s 26th Constitutional Amendment, describing it as a major blow to judicial independence. Both organizations expressed grave concerns about how this hastily-passed law threatens the integrity of one of the country’s most vital institutions, the judiciary.
Global Condemnation of the Amendment
The ICJ criticized the amendment for introducing excessive political influence over the appointment and functioning of judges. The new law allows a 12-member parliamentary committee—largely controlled by the government—to nominate the Chief Justice from a panel of the three senior-most judges, a departure from the previous system that appointed the senior-most judge by default.
Read More: DON’T CRY FOR ME – PAKISTAN
Santiago Canton, the ICJ’s Secretary General, issued a scathing statement, warning that the amendment “erodes the judiciary’s capacity to function independently and effectively as a check on excesses by other branches of the state.” The law, Canton added, “undermines the rule of law and human rights protection in Pakistan,” enabling political interference in the judicial process.
📌🇵🇰 The 26th Constitutional Amendment, passed by the #Pakistan’s #Parliament today, is a blow to judicial independence, the rule of law, and human rights protection, said @ICJ_Asia
— ICJ – Asia and the Pacific (@ICJ_Asia) October 21, 2024
UN Human Rights Chief Volker Turk echoed these concerns, stating that the amendment, “adopted hastily, without broad consultation and debate,” will severely weaken the independence of Pakistan’s judiciary. He stressed that constitutional reforms must align with international human rights law, calling the passage of the amendment a worrying sign for democratic governance in the country.
#Pakistan: @volker_turk concerned that latest constitutional amendments – adopted hastily, without broad consultation and debate – will seriously undermine independence of the judiciary.
Constitutional reforms must be in line with international human rights law. pic.twitter.com/1WvDelniBV— UN Human Rights (@UNHumanRights) October 22, 2024
A Threat to Judicial Independence
Lawyers and political commentators in Pakistan have also voiced their opposition to the new amendment. The new law enables the government to exert undue influence over the judiciary, with many viewing it as a step toward authoritarianism. Senior lawyer Salahuddin Ahmed called the move “a permanent subjugation of the judiciary by the executive,” warning that it would lead to the creation of politically motivated judicial benches.
The amendment also grants the newly-empowered parliamentary committee significant influence over the formation of constitutional benches, which will now oversee matters involving the interpretation of the constitution and the protection of fundamental rights. Critics argue that this could lead to biased rulings in cases of political importance, with the judiciary acting more as an extension of the government rather than an independent institution.
Concerns Over the Amendment’s Passage
The process by which the 26th Amendment was passed has further raised alarm. The amendment was rushed through Pakistan’s bicameral parliament in less than 24 hours, with no public consultations or broader debate. Critics allege that the government used coercive tactics, including threats and bribes, to secure the votes needed for its passage.
Opposition leaders, particularly from the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), have condemned the bill as a move to safeguard the ruling coalition’s grip on power. PTI’s General Secretary Salman Akram Raja argued that the establishment, a reference to Pakistan’s military, is behind the amendment to ensure that judicial appointments serve their interests.
As the international community condemns Pakistan’s 26th Amendment, concerns are mounting over the future of the country’s democratic framework. The judiciary is now more vulnerable to political manipulation than ever before. The ICJ and UNHCR’s strong rebuke underscores the gravity of this legislative change, emphasizing the risk it poses not only to the judiciary but to Pakistan’s broader rule of law and democratic stability.
