President gives assent to 27th Amendment after Senate nod
• Upper house passes bill with two-thirds majority after heated debate
• Opposition calls amendment ‘poisonous’, slams govt’s ‘haste’
ISLAMABAD: Hours after its passage by the Senate on Thursday, President Asif Ali Zardari gave his assent to the 27th Constitutional Amendment Bill, turning it into law.
The bill was passed amid opposition protests following a debate that began in the upper house of parliament after two opposition members voted in favour of it.
Following its previous practice, the opposition staged a protest during the passage of the bill in the Senate.
They gathered in front of the Senate chairman’s dais and chanted slogans in an attempt to disrupt the proceedings of the upper house. The opposition rejected the 27th Amendment and termed it “poisonous”.
The summary signed by the president, a copy of which is available with Dawn, states: “The Constitution (Twenty-Seventh Amendment) Bill, 2025, is assented to, as advised by the prime minister, at para 5 of the summary.”
Meanwhile, sources told Dawn that the president was expected to administer the oath to the chief justice of the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) — the establishment of which will now be realised following the enactment of the 27th Amendment — on Friday (today).
Announcing the result, Senate Chairman Yousuf Raza Gilani said 64 votes had been cast in favour of the bill and four against it. “So the motion is carried by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of the Senate, and consequently, the bill stands passed,” he declared.
Four votes were polled against the bill, while PTI senators did not participate in the voting process.
The house first voted on the bill clause by clause and then by division. While clause-by-clause voting was under way, slogans of “Aain ki tabahi na manzoor (destruction of the Constitution unacceptable)” echoed through the house, prompting Mr Gilani to say at one point, “No slogans.”
Senate proceedings
The bill was initially presented in the Senate for voting on Monday and passed the same day. It was then referred to the NA, which approved it with some amendments on Thursday.
Therefore, the amended bill was again presented in the Senate that day for consideration of the latest changes.
Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar again tabled the bill in the upper house of parliament.
Elaborating on the changes and salient features of the bill, he said the incumbent Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) would continue to hold office until his retirement.
Later, the senior-most judge among the top judges of the Supreme Court and the newly established FCC would assume the title of CJP.
He added that according to the proposed amendment, the CJP would administer the oath to the president, the chief election commissioner, and the auditor general of Pakistan.
Explaining the changes to Article 6 of the Constitution, which dealt with the subject of treason, he said the provision would now read: “Any court in Pakistan — be it the FCC, which will now, God willing, be established, the Supreme Court, or the high courts — cannot validate the abrogation [of the Constitution].”
This change, he maintained, was akin to blocking martial laws and upholding democracy.
On the occasion, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, who is also the leader of the house in the Senate, congratulated the ruling allies on the passage of the bill.
He also lauded two opposition members, Saifullah Abro and Ahmed Khan, for voting in favour of the bill.
Speaking against the proposed amendment, PTI Senator Ali Zafar criticised the government for its “haste”.
“They want to establish their constitutional court at the earliest so that they can control it. And the reason behind this haste is the fear of one person, who is in jail a few miles away from here,” Mr Zafar alleged, referring to his incarcerated party founder, Imran Khan.
Issue of defection
Immediately after the law minister tabled the bill in the Senate, Mr Zafar pointed out that the house would be voting for the second time on the constitutional amendment.
The amendment, he said, required the support of a two-thirds majority in the Senate, meaning at least 64 votes.
He recalled that during the first vote, PTI’s Saifullah Abro and another senator from the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam-Fazl had voted in favour of the amendment, against their party line.
After casting his vote, Mr Abro had announced his resignation on the floor of the house.
The Senate chairman said he had not received any resignation; therefore, how could Mr Abro be barred from voting?
Senator Zafar pointed out that Mr Abro’s defection invoked Article 63-A, which stipulated that a member voting against the party line stood disqualified. Moreover, he noted, Mr Abro had also publicly announced his resignation.
In light of these developments, Mr Zafar requested that the vote of the defecting senator not be counted.
Speaking after him, JUI-F’s Kamran Murtaza complained that “a member of ours was won over”.
“He [Ahmed Khan] voted in favour of the amendment, and it could not have been a choice made out of his own good conscience,” he said.
However, Law Minister Tarar contended that if a member voted against the party line on a no-confidence motion, a budget or money bill, or a constitutional amendment, the party head could send a reference against them to the presiding officer.
He added that the presiding officer in the NA would be the speaker, and in the Senate, its chairperson.
As for the issue of resignation, he stressed that the concerned member must submit their resignation in writing to the Senate chairperson, who would then issue a ruling on it.
Later, Adviser to the Prime Minister on Political Affairs Senator Rana Sanaullah criticised the opposition for describing clauses of the 27th Amendment as “poisonous”.
Responding to JUI-F Senator Maulana Attaur Rehman’s point of personal explanation, Mr Sanaullah said the Maulana was not only the parliamentary leader of his party but also represented a political ideology and school of thought.
‘Strictly professional’
While speaking on amendments to Article 243, the minister said the changes related to the army’s internal command structure were strictly professional.
He recalled that Pakistan, after 78 years, had achieved an unprecedented military success.
The minister added that if the government, in recognition of Pakistan’s recent military success, had followed due process to confer the rank of field marshal on the army chief, there was “nothing objectionable or unconstitutional” in incorporating that honour into the Constitution.
Published in Dawn, November 14th, 2025