A major constitutional battle unfolded in Pakistan’s Supreme Court as an eight-member Constitutional Bench (CB) resumed hearing petitions challenging the 26th Amendment, which redefined judicial powers and tenure. Senior lawyer Munir A. Malik argued that the court could order the formation of a full court through “judicial powers,” emphasizing that such an order would be binding under Article 191A.
The 26th Amendment, passed under controversial circumstances last year, curbed the Supreme Court’s suo motu powers, set a three-year term for the Chief Justice of Pakistan, and introduced a parliamentary committee to select the CJP from among the three most senior judges. The amendment also created the Constitutional Bench now reviewing its legality.
During Thursday’s live-streamed proceedings, Malik supported earlier calls for a full court, arguing that it existed even before the amendment and could be reconstituted through judicial authority. The bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan, questioned whether it had the power to form a full court, while other judges discussed the amendment’s constitutional validity.
The petitions, filed by multiple bar associations, the PTI, and legal bodies, urge the apex court to annul the amendment, claiming it undermines judicial independence. Petitioners also seek the nullification of related laws — including the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act 2024 — asserting they stem from an unconstitutional amendment.
As the hearings continue, the Supreme Court must decide whether to form a full court or let the current eight-member CB determine the fate of the 26th Amendment — a ruling that could reshape Pakistan’s judicial framework.
