Warns New FCC, Expanded Immunity, and Rushed Approval Threaten Rule of Law and Fair Trial Rights
national assembly. Photo: Archive
Amnesty International has said Pakistan’s 27th Constitutional Amendment was part of a “concerted and sustained attack on the independence of the judiciary, the right to a fair trial and the rule of law”, urging authorities to carry out an urgent review of the legislation.
In a detailed public statement issued on Tuesday, Amnesty said the amendment posed a “serious threat” to judicial independence by creating a Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) that “lacks independence, erodes the security of judges in office and insulates the president and the heads of the naval, armed and air forces from accountability.”
The 27th Constitutional Amendment is a radical change to the Constitution of Pakistan that restructures the country’s judicial and military framework. It establishes a Federal Constitutional Court whose decisions bind all other courts, including the Supreme Court, while giving the executive decisive influence over judicial appointments and transfers.
The amendment also rewrites key defense-related provisions, alters the military command structure and extends constitutional protection and immunity to the president and top military commanders, moves that critics say undermine judicial independence, weaken checks and balances and concentrate power in the executive.
Read: President signs 27th amendment bill into law
“The 27th constitutional amendment is the crescendo of a concerted and sustained attack on the independence of the judiciary, the right to a fair trial and the rule of law in Pakistan,” the human rights body said.
He called on Pakistani authorities to urgently review the amendment to “ensure that all its provisions fully comply with Pakistan’s international human rights obligations and commitments.”
Amnesty said the amendment was “pushed through parliament” without consulting civil society, the legal fraternity or opposition parties, despite its “far-reaching consequences”.
The day the amendment became law, two senior judges of the Supreme Court resigned in protest, Amnesty noted, adding that a judge of the Lahore High Court also resigned two days later.
Former senior Supreme Court judges Mansoor Ali Shah and Athar Minallah resigned following Parliament’s passage of the 27th Constitutional Amendment. In his 13-page resignation letter, Justice Shah described the amendment as a “serious attack on the Constitution of Pakistan,” saying it had “fragmented the Supreme Court” and undermined its institutional authority.
In a further blow to the judiciary, Lahore High Court Judge Shams Mehmood Mirza also tendered his resignation, apparently in protest against the passage of the 27th Constitutional Amendment.
The organization recalled that the amendment was approved a few days after being presented, and the project was made public just a few hours before its presentation in the Senate.
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk described the amendment as “hastily adopted” and lacking “broad consultation and debate with the legal community and civil society at large,” he said.
Amnesty said the 27th Amendment further weakened judicial independence, already “significantly eroded” by the 26th Constitutional Amendment passed in October 2024.
He noted that the 26th Amendment altered the composition of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) by adding members of parliament, reducing judges to a minority, a move that “risks politicization” of judicial appointments.
Read more: In Pakistan, even judges are being tried
The previous amendment also transferred key constitutional powers from the Supreme Court to the newly created constitutional courts, which were later abolished under the 27th Amendment and replaced by the FCC.
“The Federal Constitutional Court now binds all other courts, including the Supreme Court, without being bound by any past or present ruling of the Supreme Court,” Amnesty said, warning that this could create confusion, delays and inconsistent constitutional interpretations.
Appointment concerns
Amnesty raised serious concerns about the FCC’s appointment process, noting that the president, on the advice of the prime minister, appointed the first chief justice and judges of the new court, bypassing the PCJ.
“These initial appointments raise concerns about direct political interference by the executive branch,” the statement said, adding that future appointments also remain problematic given the current composition of the JCP.
The organization also criticized amendments that allow the president to transfer high court judges without their consent, warning that transfers could be used as a punitive tool against judges who issue unfavorable rulings.
Amnesty also highlighted changes that grant lifetime immunity to the president and extend similar protections to senior military commanders, calling the provisions “broad and absolute.”
“The extension of lifetime immunity violates the principle of equality before the law and the right to an effective remedy,” the organization said, warning that the changes paved the way for “uncontrolled and arbitrary use of power.”
Attacks on the judiciary
The rights body placed the constitutional changes in the context of what it described as increasing attacks on the judiciary over the past two years.
He recalled a March 2024 open letter written by six Islamabad High Court judges detailing alleged intimidation by intelligence agencies, surveillance and threats linked to politically sensitive cases, particularly those involving former Prime Minister Imran Khan.
Also read: Pakistan’s legal system still treats citizens as subjects
Amnesty also cited threats against judges, online smear campaigns, anonymous complaints and the dismissal of Judge Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri in December 2025, which it said raised serious concerns about due process.
Amnesty urged Pakistani authorities to “immediately take all appropriate measures to safeguard the impartiality, independence and security of judges.”
“Authorities must respect their international human rights obligations, guarantee access to justice and effective remedies for victims, and respect the separation of powers and the rule of law,” the statement reads.
