Shortly after getting approval from the federal cabinet, the bill for the 27th Constitutional Amendment was tabled before the Senate on Saturday and subsequently referred to the standing committees on law and justice.

A joint session of both the NA and Senate standing committees on law and justice was then summoned to discuss the amendment.

However, during the session of the standing committees, two Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) members, Aliya Kamran and Senator Kamran Murtaza, boycotted the meeting and said the proposed draft included amendments that were discarded in the 26th Amendment bill.

Following deliberations on the proposed amendment, the law committees of both Houses adjourned the moot till Sunday.

‘Discussions will continue till consensus is reached’

Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar, speaking to the media after the adjournment of the committees, said all parties were participating in the session and they had also “requested the opposition to participate”.

“Aliya Kamran had informed us that they have instructions from their party not to attend the session; however, all other parties were in attendance. We even asked the opposition to be a part of the session.”

Tarar said the “long-awaited” proposed amendment has been in discussion for the last 10-15 years. “Even today we are having a constructive debate on the matter.”

“At the time of the 18th Amendment, it was on the constitutional agenda, and even earlier, during the 26th Amendment, but due to certain reasons, one of which was Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s suggestion that such a major change should not be made and that it would be better to move towards transition and form constitutional benches,” said Tarar.

The law minister elaborated that the formation of the benches increased the workload of the judiciary, as the same judges were hearing cases fixed for the bench and otherwise.

“The objective was to ensure that the cases fixed in the Supreme Court are not delayed further and the common man gets relief.”

Tarar added that one of the aims of the proposed changes is also to do away with the criticism of a “court within a court”. “All members have reviewed it (proposed constitutional amendment) and we have completed arguments on around 60pc of t