Pak: No discussion on 27th Amendment in SC full court meeting despite judges' letters to CJP Afridi

Islamabad [Pakistan], November 14 : There was no discussion on the 27th Amendment during a full court meeting called by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi on Friday, Dawn reported, citing a Supreme Court press release.

The meeting had earlier been expected after multiple letters requested a full court session on the amendment, which was enacted a day earlier, Dawn noted.

According to the press release quoted by Dawn, participants "unanimously updated the Supreme Court Rules, 2025 on the recommendation of the committee, comprising Justice Shahid Waheed, Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, constituted under Rule 1(4) of Order I of the Supreme Court Rules, 2025 for removal of difficulties arising in giving effect to its provisions".

The meeting also conveyed "sincere appreciation to each member of the committee individually for undertaking such a massive task of meticulously reviewing the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, drafting the Supreme Court Rules, 2025 and addressing the suggestions thereon for removal of difficulties".

The statement said the updated rules aim "to improve service delivery and ensure inexpensive and expeditious administration of justice".

The full court also approved granting senior advocate status to Muhammad Munir Paracha under Rule 5 of Order IV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2025, according to Dawn.

A day earlier, Dawn reported that Justice Salahuddin Panwhar became the third Supreme Court judge to call for a full court meeting to examine the 27th Constitutional Amendment.

In his two-page letter to the CJP, he warned that the amendment may "unsettle the careful balance that the framers intended" and could "touch upon the security of tenure, the composition of benches, the appointment and removal of judges, or even the financial and administrative autonomy of courts".

The 27th Amendment promised, on paper, to "streamline" governance through new constitutional courts, revived executive magistrates and even a relook at how the armed forces are commanded.

Before the amendment was passed, Justices Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Athar Minallah, who resigned after its enactment, had written separate letters requesting a full court meeting or judicial conference.

Justice Shah said the amendment was a political attempt to weaken the judiciary, urging the CJP to set a rule preventing changes affecting the judiciary without prior consultation. "You (CJP) act not merely as its administrator but as its guardian," he wrote, also seeking a joint convention of all constitutional court judges.

In his seven-page letter, Justice Minallah urged that a judicial conference be convened to discuss "threats to independence of the judiciary" and said "a candid and open discussion on the state of our institution, the challenges to its independence, and the steps necessary to reclaim the people's trust has become inevitable. The judiciary is at a perilous crossroads. The truth must be spoken at this moment of reckoning."

He added that Parliament may consider the judiciary's institutional view before "tinkering with the basic law of the land".

Senior lawyer Faisal Siddiqui, in a letter endorsed by former judges, had also asked the CJP to take a stand on the issue.

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor