Amnesty International has raised a significant alarm over a recent legislative change in Pakistan, warning that it poses a severe threat to the independence of the country's judiciary. The focus of concern is the 27th Constitutional Amendment Bill, which was passed by the National Assembly on July 9, 2024.
What Does the 27th Amendment Entail?
The core of the controversy lies in the amendment's provision to alter the process of appointing Supreme Court judges. The bill proposes to grant Parliament the authority to determine the tenure of the Chief Justice of Pakistan and other Supreme Court judges through legislation. This represents a fundamental shift from the current system, where judicial appointments are primarily managed by a judicial commission.
Amnesty International's statement, released on July 10, 2024, argues that this change effectively politicizes the judiciary by placing crucial decisions about judicial tenure in the hands of elected politicians. The human rights organization contends that this move could make judges susceptible to political pressure, undermining their ability to deliver impartial verdicts, especially in cases involving government actions or human rights issues.
Amnesty's Stern Warning and Global Context
In its official communication, Amnesty International did not mince words. The organization stated that the amendment "risks undermining the independence of the judiciary" and represents a "dangerous step backward" for human rights in Pakistan. They emphasized that an independent judiciary is a cornerstone of the rule of law and is essential for protecting citizens' rights and holding powerful entities accountable.
The warning comes at a time when judicial independence is a topic of intense debate in several nations. Amnesty's intervention highlights the international dimension of this domestic Pakistani law, framing it as part of a broader pattern where executive or legislative branches seek greater control over the judiciary. The organization's critique suggests that the amendment could erode public trust in legal institutions and weaken checks and balances within Pakistan's democratic framework.
Potential Consequences and the Road Ahead
The passage of this amendment could have far-reaching implications. Legal experts and civil society groups within Pakistan have echoed similar concerns, fearing that the change might lead to:
- Politicized Appointments: The potential for judges to be appointed or have their tenures decided based on political loyalty rather than merit and integrity.
- Erosion of Checks and Balances: A weakened judiciary may be less able to act as a check on executive overreach or legislative excesses.
- Impact on Human Rights Cases: Vulnerable groups and individuals seeking justice against state authorities may find the judicial path more daunting.
While the bill has been passed by the National Assembly, its journey into law is not complete. It requires approval from the Senate and the President's assent. The strong reaction from a global body like Amnesty International is likely to fuel further domestic debate and scrutiny from other international observers. The coming weeks will be critical in determining whether the amendment is enacted in its current form and what legal or political challenges it might face.
This development places Pakistan's constitutional processes under a global spotlight, raising fundamental questions about the separation of powers and the safeguarding of judicial autonomy in a democratic state.
