Bill proposes new position of Chief of the Defense Forces, replacing the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee
President Asif Ali Zardari. Photo: Archive
At the request of the Pakistan People’s Party, the draft of the proposed 27th Constitutional Amendment includes a provision granting the president life-long immunity from prosecution and arrest, ensuring that no case can be brought against the president during or after his term in office.
Sources said the clause was added following a demand by the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) during deliberations in the joint parliamentary committee.
The proposed amendment is made to Article 248B of the Constitution, which stipulates that no case can be brought against the president at any time, and no steps can be taken to arrest or punish the office holder.
Earlier, the federal government moved a major package of constitutional reforms to the upper house when the 27th Amendment Bill was formally introduced in the Senate, following approval by the federal cabinet. The bill seeks to introduce major structural changes to Pakistan’s military command framework and judicial system.
Under the proposal, a new position titled Chief of Defense Forces would be created, effectively replacing the position of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee. The amendment outlines a revised chain of command by amending Article 243, which deals with the control and command of the armed forces.
Read: The 27th Constitutional Amendment presented in the Senate and referred to a joint committee
The bill also proposes the establishment of a Federal Constitutional Court with the mandate to resolve constitutional disputes and provide an authoritative interpretation of constitutional issues. For this purpose, a new separate chapter would be inserted in Part VII of the Constitution.
Furthermore, the amendment seeks notable changes in Article 175A, which currently regulates the appointment of judges of high courts. The proposed amendments aim to reshape the judicial appointments process in line with the new framework of the constitutional court.
Restructuring of military command
According to the bill, Article 243 is amended to consolidate the command of the armed forces under a single authority. The proposed clause states that the president, on the advice of the prime minister, will appoint the Chief of the Army Staff “at the same time as Chief of the Defense Forces”, along with the Chiefs of the Navy and Air Staff, and determine their “salaries and benefits”.
The bill states that the position of chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee will be abolished effective November 27, 2025. Instead, strategic military authority would be concentrated in the new Chief of the Defense Forces.
Clause (5) states that “The office of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee shall be abolished with effect from the twenty-seventh day of November two thousand and twenty-five.”
Additional clauses outline a revised appointment structure for senior command. The Prime Minister, on the recommendation of the Chief of the Army Staff and at the same time the Chief of the Defense Forces, will appoint the Commander of the National Strategic Command, whose salaries and benefits will be determined by the Prime Minister.
Read more: From Bhutto to today: 52 years, 26 amendments, the evolution of the Constitution of Pakistan
According to clause (7), “When the Federal Government promotes a member of the Armed Forces to the rank of Field Marshal, Air Force Marshal or Fleet Admiral, such officer shall retain the rank, privileges and remain in uniform for life,” he added.
These officials are granted constitutional protection and cannot be removed except through the procedure described in article 47. The immunity available to the president under article 248 also applies to them.
Other provisions state that upon completion of his command, the federal government will determine his responsibilities “in the interests of the state” and the president, with the advice of the prime minister, will fix his salaries and privileges.
Transfer of Superior Court judges
The Bill also amends Article 200, empowering the President to transfer judges of the High Court between provinces based on the recommendation of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan, which for the purpose will include the Chief Justices of the two High Courts concerned.
The amendment adds that “the Chief Justices of both the High Courts shall also be members of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan for the purposes of this clause.”
The amendment further provides that the seniority of a transferred judge shall be counted from the date of his initial appointment and specifies that no transfer may result in a judge acquiring higher rank than the transferred Chief Justice of the High Court.
A new clause establishes that a judge who does not accept the transfer “will be considered retired.”
Proposal of the Federal Constitutional Court
An important structural change comes through the creation of a Federal Constitutional Court, introduced by a new chapter under Part VII of the Constitution. The Court will be composed of a Chief Justice and a number of judges determined by Parliament or, until then, fixed by the President. It may include an equal number of judges from each province.
The proposed article on the constitution of the court states: “The Federal Constitutional Court shall consist of a Chief Justice to be called the Chief Justice of the Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan and, therefore, such other judges as may be determined by the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) Act or, until so determined, as may be determined by the President.” Furthermore, “the Federal Constitutional Court may have an equal number of judges from each province.”
Read also: PPP has not yet taken position on dual nationality proposal: Bilawal
The court will have original jurisdiction in constitutional disputes between governments and may also hear matters related to the observance of fundamental rights. Their sentences will be declarative.
A transitional clause establishes that all petitions, appeals or requests for review currently pending before the Supreme Court or its constitutional chambers that fall within the jurisdiction of this jurisdiction will be transferred to the Federal Constitutional Court.
The judges of the court will serve until the age of sixty-eight, while the Chief Justice will serve for a period of three years, retiring at the end of the period regardless of his age.
Changes in judicial appointments
To accommodate the new court, the bill amends Article 175A, expanding the composition of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan to include the Chief Justice of the Federal Constitutional Court, the Chief Justice, senior judges of both courts and an additional judge jointly appointed by both chief justices. The elder of the two chief justices of the Supreme Court will chair the Commission.
“The president of the Commission will be the highest ranking between the President of the Federal Constitutional Court and the President of the Supreme Court”, and his inter se seniority will be determined by the date of appointment,” he added.
The transition agreements allow the president, on the advice of the prime minister, to appoint the first president of the Supreme Court and the initial judges of the Federal Constitutional Court.
The amendment also seeks to bring about changes including abolition of suo motu powers, removal of Article 184 of the Constitution and removal of Articles 186 and 191A.
Read: Judges joke about new court site
The proposed clause, which states that “in the Constitution, Article 184 shall be omitted”, effectively abolishes the long-standing original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which had empowered it to hear cases of public importance relating to the application of fundamental rights.
This omission means a structural change, by transferring said constitutional jurisdiction to the newly created Federal Constitutional Court, as provided for in the amendment.
The bill further states that “Article 186 will be omitted from the Constitution.” This eliminates the president’s power to refer questions of law to the Supreme Court for its advisory opinion, a power that had existed since the creation of the Constitution in 1973. Its omission limits the Supreme Court’s role strictly to adjudicatory matters.
