• Legal experts argue parliament cannot alter the Constitution's structure. 

• Tarar suggests the FCC address Article 184(3) and constitutional interpretation.

Azam Nazeer Tarar, the Minister of Law of Pakistan, has responded to the concerns that have been raised by the legal profession on the proposed amendments to the constitution. The Judicial Commission of Pakistan will undergo changes due to these reforms, which also involve the establishment of a Federal Constitutional Court (FCC). Concerns have been voiced by members of the legal profession, particularly the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) and the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), in particular about the appointment process for the Chief Justice of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the potential politicization of judicial nominations.


There will be further nominations made in conjunction with the Chief Justice, according to the minister, who said that the President would make the first selection of the Chief Justice of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) based on the proposal of the Prime Minister. Concerns have been raised over the possibility of executive influence in judicial processes due to the amendments that propose the addition of legislative members to the JCP. These members would include both the treasury benches and opposition benches.

Additionally, lawyers have voiced their worry about the lack of meaningful engagement with stakeholders and the secrecy surrounding the legislative process. Some of the most senior legal experts, like Ahsan Bhoon and Farooq H. Naek, have voiced their disapproval of the drafting process, stating that it does not adequately include the legal community. Tarar, on the other hand, noted that these amendments aim to boost the efficiency of the judicial system by implementing measures such as increasing the retirement age of judges and protecting environmental rights through constitutional provisions.

Despite these assurances, well-known lawyers such as Hamid Khan opposed establishing any courts that would be higher than the Supreme Court. They believed that the revisions would undermine the independence of the judiciary. It was reported in the Daily Aitadal / URDU, nationalnews, and Dawn ePaper that a petition was started to challenge the administration's decision to propose the proposal in Parliament.