ISLAMABAD: Eight out of a total of 23 members of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) have objected to the proposed amendments to Rule 87(c) of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Rules, 1976, which would increase the number of members required to requisition a meeting of the council from five to 10.

In a representation submitted to the PBC, the members also called upon the council’s Rules Committee to immediately withdraw the proposed amendment to Rule 87(c) of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Rules, 1976, failing which they may consider challenging the amendment before a competent court of law.

Those who signed the one-page letter addressed to the PBC Rules Committee include former Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Abid Shahid Zuberi, Maqsood Buttar, Shafqat M. Chauhan, Munir A. Kakar, Abdul Sattar Khan, Salahuddin Ahmed, Salman Akram Raja and Qazi M. Arshad.

In the joint letter, the members stated that they have always stood for the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary, access to justice, and the original Constitution of Pakistan as it existed before the 26th and 27th Amendments.

Move termed ‘arbitrary’, ‘undemocratic’ and motivated by mala fide intent

An informed source told Dawn that the letter may be taken up by Raja Rizwan Abbasi, who headed the Rules Committee, during one of its meetings likely to be convened soon after Eidul Azha.

The letter stated that the objections were being raised in response to the PBC’s May 13 letter, circulated in connection with the proposed amendment to Rule 87(c) of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Rules, 1976.

At the outset, the members strongly condemned the proposed amendment introduced by the Rules Committee, under which the number of members required to requisition a meeting of the Bar Council would be increased from five to 10.

“No reason whatsoever has been shared with the existing members of the PBC,” the letter claimed, adding that both the proposed amendment and the process adopted for its introduction were entirely arbitrary and undemocratic.

“It is glaringly obvious that the proposed amendment has been introduced with mala fide intentions to exclude the eight undersigned members from advocating for the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary, as the proposed amendment greatly limits the powers of the undersigned members to call for a meeting,” the letter stated.

The members further claimed that the proposed amendment was a clear attempt to curb independent voices within the Pakistan Bar Council, particularly those who had been vocally opposing the 26th and 27th constitutional amendments. They described the move as wholly undemocratic and tainted by malice.

The letter also highlighted that even in the National Assembly and Senate, opposition members retain the right to requisition meetings, arguing that fair and equal representation of the opposition forms the foundation of every democratic forum.

“Therefore, it is evident that the proposed amendment is in clear violation of our fundamental rights enshrined under Articles 4, 8, 9, 14, 17, 19 and 25 of the Constitution,” the letter emphasised.

Published in Dawn, May 20th, 2026