Pakistan’s parliament has approved a constitutional amendment granting the country’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, new powers and lifetime immunity from arrest and prosecution. The 27th constitutional amendment, signed into law on Thursday, November 13, has sparked criticism, with opponents warning that it could lead to a shift toward autocracy in the country.

The amendment significantly alters the structure of Pakistan’s military and judiciary. Under the new law, Munir, who has served as army chief since November 2022, will also oversee the country’s navy and air force. His position as field marshal is permanent, and he will be given “responsibilities and duties” even after retirement, as determined by the president with the advice of the prime minister. This change is expected to ensure Munir’s prominent role in public life for the foreseeable future.

Supporters of the amendment argue that it clarifies the military’s command structure and strengthens Pakistan’s defense capabilities in line with modern warfare requirements. Pakistan’s government-operated news agency, the Associated Press of Pakistan, cited Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif as stating that these changes are part of a broader reform agenda aimed at enhancing national security.

However, critics contend that the amendment consolidates power within the military, weakening civilian control. Munizae Jahangir, journalist and co-chair of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, voiced concerns that the amendment further tilts the power balance in favor of the military at a time when there were calls for it to be reined in.

The second significant aspect of the amendment involves changes to the judiciary. The creation of a new Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) will now handle constitutional matters, with its first chief justice and judges appointed by the president. This has raised alarms about the increasing influence of the executive over the judiciary. Jahangir criticized the move, saying it undermines the right to a fair trial, as the executive now controls the appointment of judges and the constitution of constitutional benches.

Journalist Arifa Noor also expressed concerns, stating that the judiciary is becoming increasingly subservient to the executive, leaving little room for independent operation. While some argue that separating constitutional cases from regular court cases will help reduce backlogs in the judicial system, others, including Karachi-based lawyer Salahuddin Ahmed, have dismissed this justification, pointing out that the majority of pending cases are not before the Supreme Court.

The amendment has also made it easier for judges to be transferred to different courts without their consent. If a judge refuses to move, they can appeal to the judicial commission, but if their reasons are found invalid, they will be forced into retirement. Proponents of this change argue that it will ensure better staffing of courts across the country, but critics fear it will be used as a tool to pressure judges into conforming to the government’s wishes.

The amendment’s passage has led to significant resignations within the judiciary. Two Supreme Court justices, Athar Minallah and Mansoor Ali Shah, resigned shortly after the law was enacted, citing concerns over the erosion of judicial independence. Justice Minallah expressed that the constitution he swore to uphold was no longer valid, while Justice Shah stated that the amendment had effectively dismantled the Supreme Court.

In response to the resignations, Defense Minister Khawaja Asif suggested that the justices’ departures were a reaction to the reduction of their influence over the Supreme Court, asserting that Parliament had reaffirmed the supremacy of the Constitution.

The shift in power dynamics has raised concerns about the future of Pakistan’s governance. Analysts suggest that the amendment marks a step further in the consolidation of military power, which has historically played a dominant role in Pakistan’s political landscape. Some have argued that the country is moving from a hybrid system, where civilian and military authorities share power, to a post-hybrid system dominated by the military.

Michael Kugelman, former director of the Wilson Center’s South Asia Institute, characterized the amendment as a clear signal of a deepening civil-military imbalance, with the military now firmly in control. Others, like Arifa Noor, see the development as part of a broader trend toward authoritarianism, building on previous amendments, such as last year’s 26th amendment, which granted lawmakers more influence over judicial appointments.

The amendment has ignited a national debate on the future direction of Pakistan’s democracy, with many expressing concern that the shift towards military dominance could undermine the country’s fragile democratic institutions and exacerbate social instability.