However, some PPP Punjab leaders are openly criticizing their own party for supporting the 27th Amendment
The National Assembly on Wednesday passed the 27th Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2025. PHOTO: RADIO PAKISTAN
LAHORE:
Two key allies – the PPP and the PML-N – have sharply divergent views on the 27th Amendment, revealing the conflicting space for dissent within their respective parties.
Background discussions before and during the tabling of the amendment revealed a complete disregard for an internal democratic process within the PML-N.
Leaders admitted that they themselves lacked clarity about the details of the amendment. However, they expressed no hesitation in fully supporting the measures that were introduced, insisting that “if their leadership thinks it is necessary, then so be it”.
In stark contrast, conversations with PPP leaders painted a very different picture, marked by skepticism and disappointment, with one party leader dismissing the amendment as rubbing salt in the wounds.
It is pertinent to note that it was PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari who disclosed details of the 27th Amendment to the public only after the government approached him for support.
The PPP leadership subsequently called the Central Executive Committee meeting to take its party leaders into confidence, unlike the PML-N, where taking party leaders into confidence on key issues seems to be an unfamiliar concept.
In the PML-N, a parliamentary party meeting is generally considered sufficient for internal dialogue and discussion.
Two PML-N leaders from Punjab, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said there were compromises the party was forced to make. They said the party had “not come to terms with the nature of the power equation at 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 sure that “if they are to see if this scheme has the potential to deliver, then it would require an overhaul of the existing system to allow smooth and unhindered functioning supported by law”.
Asked how he came to know about the 27th Amendment, he replied that it was through the PPP chairman’s mail. He maintained that there had been no discussion in the PML-N.
He also cited a clip of federal minister Ahsan Iqbal denying the existence of a draft amendment just ten days before the matter became public knowledge.
While he was unsure whether the clip was genuine, he insisted that the PML-N members “definitely did not know the content of the change”, although they were aware “that something was afoot”.
The second PML-N leader, who is a former civil servant who faced pressure under the PTI government, said the PML-N “has to survive in this harsh climate”.
He said the party did not take these decisions out of free will and there was no dissension in the PML-N because “almost everyone knew why it was done”.
Asked about the damage done to key state institutions by the 26th and 27th Amendments, he replied: “Nothing is etched in stone; everything can and hopefully will be undone when the stranglehold of the establishment loosens”.
He directly blamed the PTI for the compromises the PML-N was forced to make.
PPP leaders, meanwhile, took a starkly different view, with two leaders from Punjab openly criticizing their own leadership for supporting the change. They said the damage to PPP’s reputation was “irreparable”.
A leader added that “Zardari sahib too realizes this, but he declares 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 second PPP leader said that “the judiciary has been practically enslaved by the government” and expressed “disgust at what they collectively did”.
PPP information secretary Shazia Mari said the PPP had discussed the amendment during its CEC meeting to seek opinions from all members. She explained that “there was a point-by-point 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 had initially raised some eyebrows and then the draft was read to the members.”
According to her, the PPP, in accordance with a democratic process of dialogue and discussion, takes key issues before the CEC for opinion.
