However, some Punjab PPP leaders openly criticize their own party for supporting the 27th Amendment.
The National Assembly on Wednesday approved the 27th Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2025. PHOTO: RADIO PAKISTAN
LAHORE:
Two key allies, the PPP and the PML-N, have sharply divergent views on the 27th Amendment, exposing the contrasting space for dissent within their respective parties.
The substantive discussions held before and during the tabling of the amendment revealed a complete disregard for an internal democratic process within the PML-N.
The leaders admitted that they themselves lacked clarity on the details of the amendment. However, they did not hesitate to fully support whatever measure was being introduced, insisting that “if their leaders believe it is necessary, then it must be so.”
In stark contrast, conversations with PPP leaders painted a very different picture, marked by skepticism and disappointment, with one party leader denouncing the amendment as rubbing salt in the wounds.
It is pertinent to note that it was PPP president Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari who first revealed the details of the 27th Amendment to the public after the government approached him for support.
Subsequently, the PPP leadership called its Central Executive Committee meeting to give confidence to its party leaders, unlike the PML-N where trusting party leaders on key issues seems to be an unknown concept.
In the PML-N, a parliamentary party meeting is generally considered sufficient for dialogue and discussion within the party.
Two PML-N leaders from Punjab, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the party was being forced to make concessions. They said the party had “made no secret of the nature of the power equation at the centre”, adding that the question was not what was ideal, but what was necessary.
An MP from Central Punjab said they were not sure whether “this is the perfect system or not”, but were sure that “if they want to see if this arrangement has the potential to work, then a review of the existing system would be necessary to allow smooth and unhindered functioning backed by law.”
When asked how he learned about the 27th Amendment, he replied that it was through the position of chairman of the PPP. He maintained that there had been no discussion within the PML-N.
He also cited a clip of Federal Minister Ahsan Iqbal denying the existence of an amendment bill barely ten days before the matter became public.
Although he was unsure whether the clip was genuine, he insisted that PML-N members “surely did not know the content of the amendment”, although they were aware “that something was in the works”.
The PML-N’s second leader, a former civil servant who faced pressure during the PTI government, said the PML-N “has to survive in this harsh climate.”
He said the party was not making these decisions out of free will and that there was no disagreement within the PML-N because “almost everyone knew why it was being done”.
When asked about the damage done to key state institutions by the 26th and 27th Amendments, he responded: “Nothing is set in stone; everything can and hopefully will be undone when the establishment’s stranglehold weakens.”
He squarely blamed the PTI for the commitments it was forcing the PML-N to make.
Meanwhile, PPP leaders maintained a markedly different view, with two Punjab leaders openly criticizing their own leaders for supporting the amendment. They said the damage caused to the PPP’s reputation was “irreparable”.
A leader added that “Zardari sahib also realizes this, but claims that he does not want to endanger his son by going against the powers that be, so he just goes with the flow.”
The other PPP leader stated that “the judiciary is practically enslaved by the government” and expressed “disgust at what they were doing collectively.”
PPP Information Secretary Shazia Mari said the PPP had discussed the amendment during its CEC meeting to seek the opinion of all members. He explained that “there was a timely reading of the amendment and nothing was hidden from its members.” He added that “every aspect was discussed in detail and every opinion was taken into account.”
She said that even “243 had initially raised some eyebrows, and then the draft was read aloud to members.”
According to her, the PPP, in accordance with the democratic process of dialogue and discussion, submits key issues to the opinion of the CEC.
