In an unprecedented move that has sent shockwaves through Pakistan’s political and legal establishment, the country’s parliament has passed a sweeping constitutional amendment that dramatically expands the powers of the army chief while curbing the authority of the Supreme Court. The legislation, which critics describe as the most far-reaching constitutional change in decades, was approved with striking speed and with minimal opposition.
The National Assembly passed the amendment on Wednesday with a more than two-thirds majority, while only four lawmakers voted against it. Two days earlier, the Senate had already cleared the bill after opposition lawmakers boycotted the debate. This fast-tracked approval process is unusual for a constitutional change, which typically requires weeks or even months of deliberation and scrutiny. Once signed by the president an outcome seen as a mere formality the amendment will officially become law.
Under the new provisions, Army Chief General Asim Munir will be elevated to the newly created position of Chief of Defence Forces, a post that consolidates command over all three branches of Pakistan’s military: the army, navy, and air force. Furthermore, once Munir’s term ends, he will retain his rank and enjoy lifetime legal immunity a clause that critics argue places him beyond the reach of any future judicial inquiry or prosecution.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, addressing lawmakers following the vote, framed the amendment as a patriotic step toward unity and institutional coherence. “If we’ve made this part of the Constitution today, it’s not just about the field marshal,” Sharif told parliament. “It also recognizes the air force and navy. What’s wrong with that? Nations honor their heroes … We know how to show and earn respect for our heroes.”
Sharif insisted the reform was not an attempt to weaken democracy but to strengthen coordination among Pakistan’s defense institutions. Supporters within the ruling coalition echoed his sentiment, arguing that the military had always been central to the nation’s stability and deserved constitutional acknowledgment of that reality.
However, opposition members and civil society groups saw the move differently. They described it as a dangerous concentration of power that could permanently alter the balance between Pakistan’s civil institutions and its military establishment.
Members of the opposition Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), founded by jailed former Prime Minister Imran Khan, boycotted the proceedings and staged a dramatic protest, tearing up copies of the bill inside parliament. PTI spokesperson Zulfikar Bukhari called the legislation “a funeral for Pakistan’s democracy,” declaring, “None of the parliamentarians cared about democracy and the judiciary being eliminated. Rest in peace, Constitution of Pakistan.”
Beyond the military’s expanded powers, perhaps the most consequential part of the amendment concerns Pakistan’s judiciary. The reform strips the Supreme Court of Pakistan of its jurisdiction over constitutional cases and transfers those powers to a newly created Federal Constitutional Court. The judges of this new court will be appointed directly by the government a design that critics say will erode the judiciary’s independence and make it subservient to the executive branch.
Constitutional lawyer Asad Rahim Khan described the development as “completely uncharted territory,” warning that it represents a rupture in Pakistan’s legal framework unseen in almost a century. “We are facing a breach in our judicial system the likes of which we haven’t seen before,” Khan said. “The members slapping each other on the back should prepare themselves for when they’ll be seeking relief from the same courts they have destroyed and subordinated to the state.”
Echoing his concerns, another constitutional expert, Mirza Moiz Baig, said the amendment “spelled the death knell of an independent judiciary,” as it gave the prime minister and president the power to handpick the chief justice and other judges of the new Federal Constitutional Court. This, Baig argued, would effectively eliminate the judiciary’s ability to check the government’s overreach. “With the amendment’s passage,” he said, “parliament has done what previous dictators could only dream of.”
The changes have prompted alarm among lawyers’ associations, human rights groups, and democracy advocates, who see the move as a major step toward the militarization of Pakistan’s state apparatus.
The Pakistani military has long been an influential actor in the country’s politics. Over its 77-year history, the army has directly ruled Pakistan for nearly half that time through coups, military regimes, or behind-the-scenes influence. Even during periods of civilian rule, military chiefs have often played decisive roles in shaping national security policy, foreign relations, and governance.
However, this latest amendment gives that power a constitutional foundation, making it far more difficult for future governments or courts to reverse. Analysts warn that the new role of “Chief of Defence Forces” could effectively make the army chief the most powerful individual in Pakistan’s governance hierarchy — with command over all military branches, legal immunity, and, indirectly, a judiciary less capable of challenging executive or military decisions.
The passage of this law also reflects the shifting political dynamics in Islamabad, where civilian leaders, facing economic crises and internal instability, have increasingly turned to the military for support and legitimacy. Observers fear this will blur the line between civilian governance and military authority even further, turning parliament into a rubber stamp for executive and defense decisions.
The constitutional amendment passed by Pakistan’s parliament marks a watershed moment one that could reshape the country’s political architecture for generations. While Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has hailed it as a gesture of “national unity,” its implications tell a different story. By centralizing military command, granting lifetime immunity to the army chief, and curtailing the Supreme Court’s authority, Pakistan appears to have moved closer to institutional militarization and further away from the democratic checks and balances that are the hallmarks of constitutional governance.
Legal scholars describe this as a turning point not just for Pakistan’s judiciary, but for its democracy itself. “What we are witnessing,” said one Islamabad-based political analyst, “is not an evolution of institutions but their subordination to the state’s most powerful arm.”
For now, the bill awaits only the president’s signature, a ceremonial step. Yet its long-term consequences may prove anything but ceremonial. Pakistan’s democracy already fragile, often interrupted, and perpetually tested has entered a new phase, one in which the shadow of the military looms larger than ever before.
