Amendment Bill passed with majority of 64 votes in Senate.

Govt says defectors remain in office until completion of due process.

Voting against party directives is following conscience: Dar.

Federal Minister for Law Azam Nazeer Tarar presented the constitutional amendment bill again today, with the tweaks to the draft earlier approved by the upper house. The amendment bill received the 64 votes (two-thirds majority in the 96-member House) in favour and four against.

As the session kicked off with Senate Chairman Yousuf Raza Gilani presiding, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Senator Ali Zafar maintained that his party and Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUIF) defectors are disqualified under Article 63-A of the Constitution as they, in the previous session voted against the party line.

It may be noted that the government’s legislation secured votes from two opposition lawmakers, PTI’s Saifullah Abro and JUI-F’s Ahmad Khan, when the bill was voted upon in the Senate for the first time and again today.

However, the former, during after voting on the initial amendment bill on November 10, announced his resignation as a lawmaker, while Khan was asked by his party to step down for violating party lines.

Highlights of new amendment

Chief of Army Staff to assume role as Chief of Defence Forces

Field Marshal, Marshal of Air Force, Admiral of Fleet titles to remain for life

Incumbent chief justice to remain CJP until completion of current term

Senior-most among SC CJ and FCC CJ will be designated Chief Justice of Pakistan

Federal Constitutional Court to be established

Equal provincial representation approved in Federal Constitutional Court

FCC empowered to take suo motu notice upon petitions

President and prime minister to play a key role in judicial appointments

Presidential immunity limited if president assumes any public office after tenure

Judicial Commission to decide transfer of high court judges

Objections on transfers to be reviewed by Supreme Judicial Council

“If they have indeed resigned and the article applies, I request that the votes of these two members not be counted [during the re-voting]. Otherwise, we will challenge the entire process,” he added.

Meanwhile, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl’s (JUI-F) Senator Kamran Murtaza said that if someone votes against party lines and a resignation is sought from him under Article 63-A, then those who wish to vote against the party should follow proper procedures.

Tarar, however, disagreed, saying that the objection of PTI and JUI-F that a member is automatically disqualified under Article 63-A for voting against party lines is incorrect. He explained that the party head can submit a reference to the presiding officer or speaker under the Constitution. “We shouldn’t twist the Constitution for political point scoring,” he added.

He further explained the process, saying that the presiding officer has two days to examine a written reference submitted by the party head and forward it to the Election Commission. The party head must also conduct a hearing with the defector for voting against party directives, as sometimes instructions are not properly communicated.

The matter is then sent to the Election Commission, where a formal hearing is conducted. The member concerned can appeal a deseating decision in the Supreme Court.

“Until the process is formally completed in black and white, the member remains in office,” Tarar added. He also noted that a senator who resigns must submit it in writing to the Senate chairman and satisfy him. The Senate chairman clarified that he has not yet received any resignation.

Defectors followed ‘voice of conscience’: Dar

Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) Senator Ishaq Dar, responding to the opposition, said that he believes “if we try to follow every wish list then there would be no limit”.

“The fundamental point is that the amendment has already been passed and sent to the National Assembly,” he added.

Dar further stressed that the PTI highlighted certain points and weaknesses in the 27th Amendment Bill, and the major omission in Article 6 has now been addressed.

“All other changes [except for omission in Article 6] are essentially those PTI had pointed out,” he added.

DPM Dar defended the defectors, saying that voting against the party line while following one’s own conscience is called defection. However, he added, that he doesn’t think it is defection, it is rather “following the voice of conscience”.

The deputy prime minister added that casting a vote against party policy, knowing it would trigger both a political backlash and a formal reference from the party to the speaker, carries consequences.

He explained that the law was framed in a way to allow members to act against party directives if they so choose — but with the understanding that such a decision comes at a cost.

He noted that, as the Senate chairman had clarified, no resignations or formal references against the defectors have been received from any party so far. Therefore, they continue to remain honourable members of the House until the due legal and constitutional process is completed.

“They will cease to be members only once the Election Commission denotifies them after the process concludes,” he added, while also commending the defectors for voting in accordance with their conscience.

NA passes amendment bill with tweaks

A day earlier, the National Assembly passed the amendment bill that seeks to change the judicial structure and military command, with 234 votes in favour and four against amid opposition’s walkout. It included eight amendments — not part of the Senate-approved previous version — aimed at clarifying the chief justice’s position.

The amended bill fine-tunes the structure of the newly established Federal Constitutional Court (FCC), clarifies the titles and ranking of the country’s top judges, and drops several clauses from the Senate-approved draft that had sought to alter oath-related provisions for various constitutional offices.

One of the most significant updates relates to Clause 2, which modifies Article 6(2A) of the Constitution — the article concerning high treason. The National Assembly’s version adds the term “Federal Constitutional Court” after “the”, thereby explicitly including the new court within the ambit of Article 6. The earlier Senate draft had not mentioned the court by name.

The lower house also introduced a fresh Clause 2A to amend Article 10(4), which deals with preventive detention. This revision adds the words “Supreme Court” within the explanatory portion of that article.

Meanwhile, the National Assembly deleted several provisions that had appeared in the Senate’s version. Clauses 4, 19, 51, and 55 — which collectively proposed to modify the wording of oaths administered to a range of constitutional officeholders — were removed from the final text.

Clause 4 had aimed to revise Article 42, under which the president takes the oath of office before the Chief Justice of Pakistan, by substituting the phrase “Chief Justice of Pakistan” with “Chief Justice of the Federal Constitutional Court.”

Likewise, Clause 19 proposed changes to Article 168, which regulates the appointment and oath of the Auditor General of Pakistan. It would have added the term “Supreme Court” before “Chief Justice of Pakistan,” thereby slightly altering the formal oath text.

Clause 51 mirrored this approach for Article 214, which requires the Chief Election Commissioner to take the oath before the Chief Justice. The Senate draft suggested replacing this with “Chief Justice of the Federal Constitutional Court.”

Similarly, Clause 55 sought to amend Article 255(2), which applies in cases where an oath cannot be administered before the designated official. At present, the Chief Justice of Pakistan can nominate another person; the Senate version proposed transferring this authority to the Chief Justice of the Federal Constitutional Court.

All of these oath-related proposals were ultimately omitted by the National Assembly.

Another key modification came in Clause 23, which amends Article 176 to include a proviso specifying that, “notwithstanding anything contained in the Constitution, the incumbent Chief Justice shall continue to be known as the Chief Justice of Pakistan during his term in office.”

A further addition was made under Clause 56, which now defines the “Chief Justice of Pakistan” as “the senior among the Chief Justice of the Federal Constitutional Court and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court,” thereby establishing a formal hierarchy between the two judicial heads.

The multi-clause amendment bill required a two-thirds majority in the 336-member House. The ruling coalition easily secured the required votes, with the PML-N holding 125 seats, the PPP 74, the MQM-P 22, the PML-Q four, the Istehkam-e-Pakistan Party four, and one seat each held by the PML-Z, the Balochistan Awami Party, and the National Peoples Party.

However, four members from the JUI-F, once a close ally of the ruling PML-N, were the only lawmakers to register their votes against the amendments.