Editorial
In recent weeks, the 26th Amendment to the constitution has dominated discussions among the government, its allies, and the opposition. The primary focus has been on the mechanics of passing this amendment, with significant developments unfolding as the coalition government asserts it has garnered enough backing for the judicial reforms, coinciding with an upcoming parliamentary session. However, the details regarding the amendment remain vague, leading to uncertainty amid efforts to foster a broader political consensus, a task that has proven to be increasingly complex. A key player in these negotiations is PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari, who has been actively seeking agreement, often meeting with influential figures like JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman. Bhutto recently announced that a full consensus with the JUI-F has been reached, yet this apparent simplicity masks deeper tensions, especially as the PTI has requested additional time to deliberate, citing the delicate nature of the proposed changes.
Critics perceive the PTI’s call for more time as a strategic maneuver designed to stall the amendments until after the imminent retirement of Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa. Conversely, the government appears eager to advance the amendment promptly, allegedly aimed at reshaping the seniority principle within judicial appointments. This could pave the way for a panel system instead of the default promotion of the most senior judges. Amidst this backdrop of political maneuvering and speculation, the necessity for clarity and transparency becomes increasingly vital. The particulars of the amendment have not been publicly disclosed, leaving significant uncertainty about its potential implications. It is critical that any constitutional amendment, especially one affecting the judiciary, is neither rushed through nor shrouded in secrecy, as this could lead to unforeseen and potentially damaging consequences.
A silver lining in the government’s unsuccessful attempt to expedite the amendment on September 15 has been the subsequent open debate it has engendered within both media circles and political factions. Constitutional changes should always be subjected to thorough public scrutiny, and earlier attempts to quietly modify the system could have resulted in dangerous precedents, potentially undermining the democratic process and public trust. While input from bar councils, civil society, and political entities is encouraging, the urgency of time is palpable, with the government seemingly in a frantic bid to enact the amendments before leadership changes within the judiciary. The PTI, on the other hand, appears committed to thwarting these efforts until after the Chief Justice’s departure.
The pressing question is whether the hard-won consensus will culminate in substantial reform or if ongoing political disputes will delay the process beyond Chief Justice Isa’s retirement. Regardless of what transpires, it is paramount that the government remains dedicated to transparency and a democratic process. Amendments of this nature cannot be shaped solely by political expediency; they must be rooted in authentic reform, with the active participation of the public and all relevant stakeholders. The responsibility lies with both the government and the opposition to ensure that any changes stem from a commitment to meaningful governance rather than short-term political agendas. This issue transcends the judiciary; it is fundamentally about the integrity and future of Pakistan’s democratic framework. A hastily or poorly considered amendment could trigger significant repercussions for the country’s legal system. As parliament stands on the brink of possibly passing the 26th Amendment, the overarching objective must be to fortify the judicial system through these reforms. The process demands a thoughtful, inclusive, and transparent approach, with the health of Pakistan’s democracy as the ultimate priority.
Apart from all the discussion, the vital question remains the same. Does this parliament have the genuine people’s mandate even to legislate?
