Pakistan’s Constitution: Loopholes for the Rich, Rules for the Poor

The Supreme Law That Everyone Violates, But Nobody Can Afford to Destroy

Pakistan has a constitution. On paper, it is magnificent: 280 articles guaranteeing equality, justice, and protection for the powerless. In practice, it has become something else entirely; a document that powerful people violate daily, yet still cannot afford to ignore. ^{1 2 3}This paradox reveals everything about how power actually works in Pakistan.

What a Constitution Is Supposed to Be And What It Actually Is)

A constitution is not self-executing. It cannot arrest generals or imprison corrupt judges. Its power comes from three sources: citizens who believe it matters, institutions willing to enforce it impartially, and real consequences when it gets violated. ^{4 5 6 7}

Consider the United States. Its constitution survives not because Americans are virtuous, but because the system makes violations costly. Judges cannot be fired for unpopular rulings; they serve for life. Congress checks the executive; courts check Congress; each branch defends its own authority because institutional self-interest aligns with constitutional enforcement. ^{8 9}

Pakistan never built these safeguards. The 1973 Constitution promised equality before law, protection for minorities, and prevention of wealth concentration. Someone in Lahore’s slums actually believed those words. ^{2 3 10}They were wrong.

The Doctrine of Selective Enforcement

Here is how the system actually operates:

For the Wealthy:

Civil lawsuits that drag on for 25 years become weapons, not inconveniences ¹¹

Expensive lawyers turn delays into victory through exhaustion ¹²

Connections to judges, bureaucrats, and politicians transform law into negotiation ^{13 14}For the Poor:

1.86 million cases pending in district courts ¹⁵

Average resolution time: 25 years (life expectancy in Pakistan: 67 years) ¹¹

Most abandon their claims because justice is a commodity, they cannot afford ^{16 12}

The Constitution promises “inexpensive and expeditious justice”. The system delivers the opposite, and it delivers it deliberately. Judicial backlogs are not accidents of inefficiency. They are features of a system where the wealthy exploit time, the poor surrender to it, and the Constitution becomes a prop in a theater of inequality. ^{3 12 15 11}

Three Military Coups, One Pattern

General Ayub Khan 1958 Abrogated the 1956 Constitution. Created a new one in 1962 because even dictators need the illusion of legality. ¹⁷

General Zia-ul-Haq 1977 Suspended the Constitution, promised elections “within 90 days”. Ruled for 11 years. Introduced the Eighth Amendment allowing presidents to dissolve elected governments at will. Constitutional manipulation, not constitutional respect. ^{18 19 20 21}

General Pervez Musharraf 1999 Staged a coup, then declared: “The Constitution has only been temporarily held in abeyance…only another path towards democracy”. A general justifying his coup using constitutional language. ²²

Notice the pattern. None of them abolished the Constitution outright. They suspended it, amended it, justified their violations through it. Why? Because legitimacy matters, even to authoritarians. The Constitution retains symbolic power—which is why they cannot destroy it, only manipulate it. ^{23 24}

When the Document Became Dangerous: 2007

In March 2007, General Musharraf unconstitutionally suspended Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. He calculated that nobody would resist.

Eighty thousand lawyers proved him wrong. ^{25 26}

They organized strikes. They defied emergency rule. They faced arrests and beatings. The regime could not arrest them all. Public pressure mounted. Nine months later, Musharraf was forced to restore the Chief Justice. Shortly after, he resigned. ²⁵

The Constitution’s text did not change. What changed was public willingness to enforce it. This single episode demonstrated that constitutional power is not located in words—it is located in organized resistance. ^{26 27 25}

The 26th Amendment: Using the Constitution to Disarm the Constitution

In 2023, the Supreme Court ruled that military trials of civilians were unconstitutional. The military establishment could not accept this. ^{28 29}

So in October 2024, Parliament passed the 26th Amendment. It allowed politicians to appoint the Chief Justice instead of following seniority. It stripped the Supreme Court of powers to take up cases of public importance on its own. It restructured the judiciary to serve executive

interests. 30 31 32 33

A new bench, handpicked under the amendment, immediately overturned the previous ruling and restored military courts. ^{34 28}

This is constitutional capture at its most sophisticated: using legal procedures to dismantle legal constraints. The form of law is preserved; its substance is destroyed. ^{33 30 34}

Why bother with an amendment at all? Because even an authoritarian regime needs the appearance of legitimacy. The Constitution still matters; which is precisely why it must be controlled.

Why Resistance Gets Crushed

Imran Khan’s political struggle illustrates how the system responds to constitutional defiance.

After his April 2022 ouster, Khan mobilized mass protests. On May 9, 2023, after his arrest, demonstrators attacked military installations. The government’s response was swift: shoot-Onsight orders, mass arrests, internet shutdowns, military trials for civilians. ^{35 36 37 38}

The Supreme Court initially ruled military trials unconstitutional. A different bench later suspended that ruling. By July 2025, 108 PTI members had been sentenced; some received 10-year prison terms. ^{37 38 39 40}

In November 2024, Khan called for protests against the 26th Amendment. Authorities arrested

1,000 people and labelled demonstrators “bloodthirsty extremists”. ⁴¹

Why does resistance fail? Because the state possesses asymmetric force: legal cover for violations, intelligence agencies authorized to arrest without warrants, media censorship, and the willingness to label constitutional protest as terrorism. ^{38 42 43 37 41}

The Human Cost in Numbers

When constitutional protections exist only on paper, the consequences are measured in lives:

1.86 million pending cases: Justice that arrives after you die is not justice ^{15 11}

943 women killed in honor killings 2011 alone): Constitutional equality worth nothing ⁴⁴

84 blasphemy accusations 2021 Religious freedom guaranteed, weaponized in practice ⁴⁶

Rigged elections 2024 Candidates winning on election night shown losing the next day ⁴²

The Constitution promised the poor would be protected. The system taught them that law is a commodity only the rich can afford. ^{47 12 16}

What Would Change Actually Require?

Three structural shifts:

Genuine Judicial Independence: Judges protected from removal, threats, and political pressure through mechanisms similar to lifetime appointments in the US. Words on paper are insufficient; institutions must have self-interest in defending the Constitution. ^{9 8}

Dismantling Elite Capture: Breaking the networks of feudal lords, business cartels, military hierarchies, and bureaucratic insiders who control governance for private gain. This requires redistributing power itself, not rewriting constitutional text. ^{48 49 47}

Organized Public Resistance: Citizens willing to defend constitutional principles through strikes, protests, and collective action. The 2007 Lawyers Movement demonstrated this is possible—but also how rare it is. ^{27 26 25}

Without these conditions, constitutional amendments change words, not outcomes.

The Paradox That Defines Pakistan

Pakistan’s Constitution has not failed as a document. It has been systematically prevented from succeeding as a system.

It is simultaneously irrelevant and terrifying: irrelevant because it is violated constantly, terrifying because the moment it is enforced, the entire structure of elite control becomes vulnerable.

This is why generals suspend it but never abolish it. Why politicians amend it but never discard it. Why courts reinterpret it but never declare it obsolete. The Constitution’s latent power—the threat that citizens might one day demand its enforcement; remains the one thing Pakistan’s powerful cannot eliminate.

The Constitution was designed to protect the powerless. It has been redesigned, through selective enforcement and deliberate neglect, to protect power itself.

The real question is not whether the Constitution can save Pakistan. The real question is whether Pakistanis will ever force the Constitution to do what it was always supposed to do.

Until that happens, the Constitution will remain what it is today: magnificent in theory, meaningless in practice, and feared by those who violate it most.

⁂

https ://na .g ov .pk /uploads /documents /1333523681_951.pdf https ://rimap .unhcr .or g /node /61784?pa g e =1 http ://www .commonlii .or g /pk /le g is /const /1973/3.html