However, some PPP leaders in Punjab are openly criticizing their own party for supporting the 27th Amendment.
The National Assembly on Wednesday passed the 27th (Amendment) Bill to the Constitution 2025. PHOTO: RADIO PAKISTAN
LAHORE:
Two key allies – the PPP and the PML-N – have sharply divergent views on the 27th Amendment, revealing the contrasting space for dissent within their respective parties.
The substantive discussions held before and during the tabling of the amendment revealed a complete disregard for the internal democratic process within the PML-N.
The leaders admitted that they themselves lacked clarity on the details of the amendment. However, they expressed no hesitation in fully supporting the measures introduced, insisting that “if their leaders think it is necessary, then it must be so.”
In contrast, conversations with PPP leaders painted a very different picture, marked by skepticism and disappointment, with one party leader denouncing the amendment as amounting to rubbing salt in wounds.
It is pertinent to note that it was PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari who was the first to disclose the details of the 27th Amendment to the public, after the government sought his support.
The PPP leadership then 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 seems to be an unfamiliar concept.
Within the PML-N, a party parliamentary meeting is generally considered sufficient for intra-party dialogue and discussions.
Two PML-N leaders from Punjab, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the party was forced to compromise. They said the party had “made no secret of the nature of the power equation at the centre”, adding that the question was not what was ideal, but what was necessary.
A parliamentarian from central Punjab said he did not know whether “this is the perfect system or not”, but was certain that “if they want to see if this arrangement has the potential to work, then it will require an overhaul of the existing system to allow smooth and unhindered operation, supported by law”.
When asked how he learned about the 27th Amendment, he said it was through the post of Chairman of the PPP. He maintained that there was no discussion within the PML-N.
He also cited an extract from Federal Minister Ahsan Iqbal denying the existence of a draft amendment just ten days before the matter became public.
Without being sure of the authenticity of the clip, he insisted that PML-N members “surely did not know the content of the amendment”, even if they knew “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 “must survive in this harsh climate”.
He said the party was not making these decisions out of free will and that there was no dissent within the PML-N because “almost everyone knew why this was being done.”
Asked about the damage done to key state institutions by the 26th and 27th Amendments, he said, “Nothing is written in stone; all can be and hopefully will be undone when the grip of the establishment weakens.”
He squarely blamed the PTI for the compromises the PML-N was forced to make.
PPP leaders, meanwhile, had a very different view, with two Punjab leaders openly criticizing their own leaders for supporting the amendment. They said the damage to the PPP’s reputation was “irreparable”.
A leader added that “Zardari sahib is also aware of this, but he says he does not want to put his son in danger by going against the powers that be, so he is just going with the flow.”
The other PPP leader said “the judiciary has been virtually subjugated by the government” and expressed his “disgust at what they were doing collectively.”
PPP Information Secretary Shazia Mari said the PPP discussed the amendment at its CEC meeting to seek opinions from all members. She explained that “there was a timely reading of the amendment, and nothing was hidden from their members.” She added that “every aspect was discussed in detail and every opinion was taken into account.”
She said that even “Project 243 initially raised eyebrows, and then the draft was read to members.”
According to her, the PPP, in accordance with a democratic process of dialogue and discussion, submits key issues to the CEC for opinion.
