Pakistan judges blocked from filing petition against constitutional overhaul

Four judges of Pakistan’s Islamabad High Court attempted to challenge a sweeping constitutional amendment that reshapes the country’s judicial system, only to have their petition turned away at the door of the Supreme Court.

The judges had sought to file a constitutional petition against the 27th Amendment, which critics say hands unprecedented power to the executive over the courts. But the Supreme Court’s registrar returned the document, citing new rules introduced under the same amendment that bar constitutional petitions from being filed directly with the top court.

The petition, drafted by Justices Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Babar Sattar, Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan and Saman Rafat Imtiaz, argues that the amendment fundamentally compromises the separation of powers by reshaping how judges are appointed, transferred and disciplined. The changes, they warn, place the superior judiciary under the “effective control” of the executive—dismantling long-standing safeguards designed to protect courts from political interference.

A central point of contention is the creation of a new Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), tasked with handling constitutional disputes previously heard by the Supreme Court. The petitioners say the appointment of the FCC’s first chief justice and judges - made by the president on the advice of the prime minister - was carried out without meaningful consultation with the judiciary. They argue that the selection process appeared predetermined, with names circulating publicly even before the amendment had passed parliament.

The judges also objected to a revised Article 200, which now allows high court judges to be transferred without their consent. They warned the provision could be used to sideline or pressure judges who issue rulings that displease the government, effectively eroding judicial security of tenure. Several ongoing appeals concerning judicial transfers and administrative disputes within the Islamabad High Court could, they argued, become irrelevant under the new system.

Tensions extend to the newly approved 2025 Code of Conduct for Judges, endorsed by a Supreme Judicial Council whose own composition is under legal challenge. The petition argued that the code contains vague and intrusive provisions that could be weaponized to discipline judges arbitrarily, amplifying fears of executive-led oversight over the bench.

Invoking landmark rulings, the petition insists that judicial independence forms part of Pakistan’s constitutional “basic structure”, and therefore cannot be diluted - even through formal constitutional amendments. Taken together, the 26th and 27th Amendments, the judges argue, amount to a systematic weakening of constitutional courts by expanding executive influence over the judiciary’s internal affairs.

For now, the petition remains unfiled due to the registrar’s objection and it is unclear whether the judges will seek another legal route.