Some PPP Punjab leaders, however, openly criticise own party over supporting 27th Amendment
The National Assembly has passed the 27th Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2025 on Wednesday. PHOTO: RADIO PAKISTAN
LAHORE:
Two key allies — the PPP and PML-N — hold starkly divergent views on the 27th Amendment, exposing the contrasting space for dissent within their respective parties.
Background discussions held before and during the tabling of the amendment revealed a complete disregard for an internal democratic process within the PML-N.
Leaders admitted they themselves lacked clarity about the specifics of the amendment. However, they expressed no hesitation in fully supporting whatever measures were being introduced, insisting that “if their leadership thinks it’s necessary, then it must be so”.
In stark contrast, conversations with PPP leaders painted a very different picture, marked by scepticism and disappointment, with one party leader decrying the amendment as akin to rubbing salt on the wounds.
It is pertinent to note that it was the PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari who first disclosed details of the 27th Amendment to the public, after the government approached him for support.
The PPP leadership subsequently convened its Central Executive Committee meeting to take its party leaders into confidence, unlike the PML-N, where taking party leaders into confidence on key issues appears to be an unfamiliar concept.
In the PML-N, a parliamentary party meeting is generally considered sufficient for intra-party dialogue and discussion.
Two PML-N leaders from Punjab, speaking on condition of anonymity, said there were compromises the party was being forced to make. They said the party had “made no bones about the nature of the power equation in the centre”, adding that the issue was not about what was ideal, but what was necessary.
A parliamentarian from Central Punjab said they were unsure whether “this is the perfect system or not”, but were certain that “if they are to see whether this arrangement has the potential to deliver, then it would require an overhaul in the existing system to allow smooth and unhindered functioning backed by law”.
Asked how he came to know about the 27th Amendment, he replied that it was through the PPP chairman’s post. He maintained there had been no discussion within the PML-N.
He also cited a clip of Federal Minister Ahsan Iqbal denying the existence of a draft amendment mere ten days before the matter became public knowledge.
While unsure whether the clip was genuine, he insisted PML-N members “surely did not know the content of the amendment,” though they were aware “that something was in the works”.
The second PML-N leader, who is a former office-bearer who faced pressure during the PTI government, said the PML-N “has to survive in this harsh climate”.
He said the party was not taking these decisions out of free will, and that there was no dissent within the PML-N because “almost everyone knew why it was being done”.
Asked about the damage done to key state institutions by the 26th and 27th Amendments, he responded: “Nothing is being etched on the stone; everything can and hopefully will be undone when the establishment’s stranglehold will weaken”.
He squarely blamed the PTI for the compromises the PML-N was being forced to make.
PPP leaders, meanwhile, held a sharply different view, with two leaders from Punjab openly criticising their own leadership for supporting the amendment. They said the damage being done to the PPP’s reputation was “irreparable”.
One leader added that “Zardari sahib, too, realises this, but he states that he does not want to endanger his son by going against the powers that be, so he is just going with the flow”.
The other PPP leader said that “the judiciary has been practically enslaved by the government” and expressed “disgust at what they were collectively doing”.
PPP Information Secretary Shazia Mari said the PPP had discussed the amendment during its CEC meeting to seek the opinion of all members. She explained that “there was point-wise reading of the amendment, and nothing was kept from their members.” She added that “every aspect was discussed in detail and every opinion was taken into account.”
She said that even “243 initially had raised some eyebrows, and then the draft was read out to the members.”
According to her, the PPP, in keeping with a democratic process of dialogue and discussion, takes key issues before the CEC for its opinion.
