27th Amendment: SC full court meeting rejects suggestion for collective resignation

A majority of Supreme Court judges have turned down a proposal for collective resignations during a tense full court meeting convened on November 14 to discuss the impact of the 27th Constitutional Amendment on the court’s powers, Aaj News reported citing sources.

President Asif Ali Zardari on November 13 gave his assent to the long-debated 27th Constitutional Amendment after its approval from the parliament amid protest by the opposition.

The constitutional tweaks, which establish a Federal Constitutional Court to deal with constitutional matters among other amendments, are blamed for having curtailed the powers of the apex court.

Two senior SC judges had stepped down a day after the 27th Constitutional Amendment became law, deeming the legislation to be contrary to the constitution and damaging to judicial independence.

27th Amendment: LHC to proceed with pleas on Dec 5

According to sources, 13 judges attended the SC full court meeting chaired by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, while Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Ayesha A. Malik and Justice Musarrat Hilali were absent due to illness or personal commitments.

The judges held a detailed discussion on concerns that the amendment had curtailed the Supreme Court’s authority. Some members proposed that the bench step down collectively to block the parliament from legislating further, but the suggestion failed to win consensus.

Chief Justice Afridi reportedly cautioned that judges should address such matters through direct communication instead of writing letters to the government or its institutions.

President Zardari accepts resignations of SC judges Mansoor Ali Shah, Athar Minallah

He stressed that while the court retains the constitutional power to review legislation, it can only exercise this authority after a law is enacted, and therefore cannot restrain the parliament from legislating in advance.

The meeting also took note of the recent resignations of Justices Mansoor Ali Shah and Athar Minallah, with the chief justice remarking that they should have consulted him beforehand.

Sources described the atmosphere as sombre and tense, with judges underscoring the need for a strong institutional response and reaffirming the judiciary’s responsibility to maintain impartiality and effective performance. The meeting ended without a unanimous decision.