The summoning of Parliament today, as soon as the dignitaries assembled have gone off after the SCO Summit, indicates that the government feels it is in a position to pass the constitutional amendment it failed to table last month, after several days of keeping both Houses in attendance, ready to take up the case. The government had shrouded the whole process with urgency and secrecy, thus giving rise to fears even among sympathizers that the amendments were merely an excuse to carry out certain shortsighted measures for its own political purposes, not to bring about changes beneficial to the country as a whole.
One of the major developments that has occurred is the JUI(F) is reported to have acceded to the PPP, and agreed to support the amendments. The government will be unable to complete the numbers needed for the Amendment (two–thirds majorities in each House) unless the JUI(F) comes on board. While the recent Supreme Court verdict on the review petition against its judgement opens the way to PTI-backed MNAs voting as they wish, there may not be enough floor crossers in the Senate. Whatever the various permutations, the bottom line is apparently the government feels it has the requisite numbers. The important caveat is that that is how the government felt last time, and ended up with egg on its face. That may happen again.
The main reason is that the country is not really behind the amendment. It is not like an ordinary law, where parties may decide on their own. Also, this is not a minor matter of detail, but a major overhaul of the judicial system, with the introduction of an entirely new court at the apex of the judiciary. This would involve the government unveiling, indeed publicizing, the proposed changes, and then unleashing its supporters to take their case to the public. PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has said that more time might be needed. Mr Bhutto Zardari is convinced that there must be a constitutional court, even more so than Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who sees it as solving certain political problems, not as a promise inherited from his mother. He seems to be expressing the correct position, that there has probably not been enough debate on the amendments for them to be brought before Parliament. At the same time, the JUI(F) effort to bring the PTI on board does not seem fruitful, though it does allow the JUI(F) wiggle vroom in case it wishes to back out.
