Pakistan is moving ahead with a highly debated constitutional amendment that many observers believe is specifically intended to fortify the authority and long-term position of its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir. Over the past half-year, Munir’s prominence in Pakistan’s political and security landscape has become increasingly evident, reinforcing his status as arguably the most influential individual in the country. Amid this backdrop, the decision to amend the Constitution is seen by analysts as a direct effort to ensure that Munir’s command remains unchallenged and prolonged.
The first public hint of this amendment did not come from the government but from PPP leader Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari, who disclosed that Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif had contacted his party to seek support for the constitutional change. This revelation triggered immediate debate, raising concerns and speculation across Pakistan’s political spectrum and media circles. Many pointed to the secrecy around the move as a sign of its strategic nature and potential implications.
The proposed amendment touches on several aspects of the Constitution, including judicial matters and the movement of judges between courts. However, the provision that has caused the most alarm relates to Article 243, which defines the federal government’s authority over the armed forces. This clause currently affirms civilian command, yet many believe the current proposal is crafted to modify that balance in favor of the military leadership. Critics argue that the amendment would indirectly cement Munir’s authority and widen the military’s already significant role in the country’s governance.
Pakistan has a long history of military involvement in civilian affairs, making this development unsurprising to many analysts. Earlier this year, following a brief period of border tensions with India, Munir received the rare rank of Field Marshal, becoming only the second individual in Pakistan’s history to hold the title. Despite his elevation, the Constitution does not formally recognize this rank, and Munir’s term is officially set to end in late November. For this reason, the amendment is interpreted by many as a device to legitimize and extend his leadership beyond the current legal boundaries.
Government officials have responded cautiously. Pakistan’s minister of state for law, Aqeel Malik, acknowledged the constitutional inconsistency regarding Munir’s rank and suggested the amendment could be a corrective measure. Yet, without clear confirmation, the ambiguity has only deepened the public suspicion that the civilian government may be yielding further ground to the military establishment.
Across the political and strategic community, voices have expressed strong concern. Some former lawmakers and diplomats have openly stated that the amendment appears to be tailored specifically to bolster the military’s position at the expense of democratic balance. Former US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad questioned whether Pakistan was preparing to shift operational command of the armed forces directly to the army chief, potentially weakening civilian control. Pakistani analysts have echoed similar worries, with several describing the amendment as a blatant power consolidation move.
Munir’s recent conduct has also intensified scrutiny. He has taken a leading role not only in defense matters but also in foreign affairs and economic issues — responsibilities traditionally associated with elected civilian leaders. His frequent visits to the United States, meetings with high-level figures, including former US President Donald Trump, and visible participation in diplomatic engagements have reinforced the impression that Pakistan’s military now exercises unprecedented influence in governance. Meanwhile, the political climate at home remains tense, with opposition leaders marginalized and former Prime Minister Imran Khan still incarcerated while facing legal challenges.
The amendment process requires a two-thirds majority in both chambers of Parliament, a hurdle that has historically marked significant constitutional changes in Pakistan. If passed, the amendment could reshape the balance of power between civilian institutions, the judiciary, and the military. Regional dynamics also play a role, as India closely monitors these developments, particularly in light of Munir’s aggressive statements on Kashmir and his warnings about potential military confrontation.
In essence, Pakistan stands at a critical juncture. The amendment is seen by many as a step that could entrench military dominance and elevate Munir’s influence to a near-unchallengeable level. While proponents may argue it brings structural clarity and constitutional alignment, critics see a move that risks undermining democratic norms and reinforcing Pakistan’s long-standing pattern of military supremacy. Whether this development ultimately solidifies Munir’s authority or triggers political resistance remains to be seen, but its consequences will likely resonate across Pakistan’s political future and its relations with neighboring India.
