The Amendment Process of the Constitution of Pakistan: Political Dynamics & Legal Implications

Abstract

Pakistan’s constitutional amendment process reflects a persistent tension between democratic aspirations and authoritarian legacies, shaped by political dynamics and legal ambiguities. The 1973 Constitution, amended 26 times, oscillates between empowering democracy (e.g., the 18th Amendment’s federalism) and entrenching autocracy (e.g., Zia’s 8th Amendment). While Articles 238-239 mandate a two-thirds parliamentary majority for amendments, military regimes and elite negotiations have frequently subverted this process. The judiciary’s inconsistent application of a basic structure doctrine evident in cases like NRO (2009) and District Bar Association (2015) further complicates the balance between parliamentary sovereignty and constitutional supremacy. Challenges include politicization (e.g., Musharraf’s 17th Amendment), instability from frequent changes, and public distrust due to exclusionary elite bargaining. Comparative lessons from India’s basic structure jurisprudence and Bangladesh’s post-crisis reforms highlight the need for participatory mechanisms, judicial consistency, and military accountability. Reforms like digital crowdsourcing of amendments and sunset clauses for emergency measures could transform Pakistan’s Constitution into a resilient, inclusive framework.

Keywords: Constitutional Amendments, Pakistan, Basic Structure Doctrine, 18th Amendment, Federalism, Judicial Review, Military Influence, Political Instability, Participatory Governance.