As the government moved towards passing the 27th Constitutional Amendment, former judges and prominent lawyers on Monday urged Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi to convene a full court meeting to discuss the proposed legislation.
The request came in a letter dated November 9 and a copy of which is available with Sunrisewritten by Senior Advocate Faisal Siddiqi. It was also signed and endorsed by former SC chief judge retired judge Mushir Alam, retired former Sindh High Court (SHC) judge Nadeem Akhtar and nine other senior lawyers.
The letter said the letter was being written “not in normal times but in times that presented the greatest threat to the Supreme Court of Pakistan since its inception in 1956.”
He called the 27th Amendment Act the “largest and most radical restructuring of the structure of the Federal Court of Appeal since the enactment of the Government of India Act, 1935.”
“We say this, without fear of contradiction, that no civil or military government in the history of Pakistan has even attempted, much less succeeded, in relegating the Supreme Court of Pakistan as a subordinate court and permanently stripping it of its constitutional jurisdiction, as is being done through the proposed Constitution (Twenty-Seventh Amendment) Act, 2025,” the lawyers and judges said in the letter.
“If Your Lordship agrees with us that this proposed Amendment Bill is the largest and most radical restructuring of the Supreme Court of Pakistan since its inception, then we would respectfully request, and fully expect, Your Honor to convene a plenary meeting of the court to discuss this proposed Amendment Bill and to give an appropriate response to the federal government in the form of inputs and suggestions regarding this proposed Amendment Bill,” they added.
“We would respectfully like to explain to Your Lordship that the Supreme Court has every right and power to give its opinion to the federal government on any proposed amendment law,” the legal experts said, adding that the legislation proposes a “radical restructuring” of the basic essence, structure and constitutional obligation of SC to administer justice to all.
The letter reiterated the call for an immediate meeting of the full court, noting that the Amendment was expected to be approved on November 11 (today) “or any day thereafter.”
The lawyers and judges added that in case this application was rejected on the “pretext of neutrality or non-interference with legislation (which we consider unfounded reasons), then we would at least expect you to accept and admit in a written reply that you are now reconciled to being the last Chief Justice of Pakistan and now reconciled to accepting the demise of the Supreme Court of Pakistan as the highest court of Pakistan.”
“At least with this admission on his part, we would no longer have any expectation from His Honor to be a defender of the Supreme Court,” they said.
The letter requested that, as this was a matter of “utmost public importance,” a copy of the letter be given to the media.
Apart from Siddiqui and retired Justices Alam and Akhtar, the letter was also endorsed by former Attorney Generals of Pakistan (AGP) Muneer A. Malik, Anwar Mansoor Khan; former presidents of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Abid Shahid Zuberi, Ali Ahmad Kurd, Muhammad Akram Sheikh and Kanrani B. Amanullah; and SC defenders Khwaja Ahmad Hosain, Salahuddin Ahmed and Shabnam Nawaz Awan.
Zuberi, Sheikh and Salahuddin are among the petitioners who have challenged the 26th Amendment, which had also faced widespread opposition from the legal community at the time of its passage in October 2024. Kurd and other lawyers had vowed to launch a protest movement to reject that amendment and “restore the independence of the judiciary.”
Malik and Hosain had last month filed their arguments in the 26th Amendment case as lawyers of the Balochistan High Court Bar Association (BHCBA) and veteran politician Afrasiab Khattak, respectively.
Judicial restructuring proposal
Shortly after its approval by the federal cabinet, the Constitution (Twenty-Seventh Amendment) Act, 2025 was introduced in the Senate on Saturday amid opposition outcry over the pace and scope of the proposed changes. The Senate met today for the third consecutive day and is likely to give the green light to the legislation, after which it will reach the National Assembly.
Among the various changes proposed in the Amendment, many pertain to the judicial branch, the most notable being the formation of a Federal Constitutional Court (FCC). The FCC would deal with constitutional issues and its decisions would be binding on all courts, including the Supreme Court itself, which has led many experts to believe that the adjustments would, in effect, dethrone the SC as the highest judicial forum in the country.
See this post on Instagram
At the center of the amendment is the creation of a new high court, the FCC, based on the constitutional courts formed under the 26th Amendment, which remains challenged before the SC.
Even before the 27th Amendment gets the nod from parliament, the government has already begun restructuring the higher judiciary, shortlisting seven judges for appointment to the FCC.
Justice Aminuddin Khan, currently heading the SC Constitution Bench, is being considered for appointment as FCC Chief Justice. Also under discussion is the inclusion in the initial composition of the FCC of the names of South Carolina judges Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Musarrat Hilali, Aamer Farooq and Ali Baqar Najafi, along with SHC judge KK Agha and Balochistan High Court chief justice Rozi Khan Barrech.
Sources said the initial strength of the FCC would be determined by a Presidential Order, while any subsequent increase in the number of judges would require an Act of Parliament.
Inserted into the Constitution as Chapter 1A, the FCC would have its own chief justice, who would serve a fixed three-year term, and judges, who could be appointed by the SC, senior superior court judges with at least seven years of experience or senior lawyers with more than two decades of practice.
FCC judges would retire at age 68. The retirement age of SC judges is currently 65 years as per Article 179 of the Constitution.
The amendment further stipulates that the president can transfer a high court judge from one high court to another on the recommendation of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP). A judge of a superior court who does not accept a transfer in accordance with this article shall be deemed to have been removed from office.
The FCC would assume some of the SC’s most important powers. Under the new Article 189, the SC would be demoted to a high court for civil and criminal appeals only, while the FCC’s decisions would be binding on all courts, including the SC itself.
The FCC would also have exclusive jurisdiction over disputes between the Federation and the provinces, or between provinces, and could, on its own initiative, take up any case involving a “substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.”
Additionally, the FCC would assume the authority of the SC in cases involving the application of fundamental rights, appeals from higher courts on constitutional issues, writ petitions under Article 199 (except family and rental cases), and even the power of the president to seek advisory opinions from the high court.
