- Islamabad, Pakistan: “As usual, PTI is spreading misleading claims regarding constitutional immunity for state offices, particularly about recent amendments. These claims are factually incorrect and designed to confuse the public”.
This was said by an official of PMLN government team dealing with Constitutional amendments.
Talking to DND News Agency, he said that immunity under Article 248 is neither a privilege nor a personal concession; it is a constitutional safeguard designed to ensure institutional stability. He was of the view that the President of Pakistan has always enjoyed immunity during his term. The recent amendment does not grant protection to any individual but reinforces an existing constitutional framework that prevents political victimization of state office-holders.
Referring to PTI’s media campaign against 27th Constitutional amendment, he stated that PTI falsely connects this amendment to General Pervez Musharraf’s case. The Musharraf trial was a specific judicial proceeding and has no relation to the proposed amendment. The purpose of the current reform is to curb the historical pattern of political revenge and strengthen institutional neutrality.
Around the world, top constitutional and military offices such as presidents or service chiefs enjoy institutional immunity to maintain continuity and stability. Such protections ensure that transitions of power do not lead to retaliatory legal action against predecessors.
He was of the opinion that a proper understanding of constitutional immunity requires reading Article 248 alongside Article 199(3), which excludes armed forces personnel from High Court jurisdiction regarding matters related to their service. This provision has been part of the 1973 Constitution since its inception.
“Ranks such as Field Marshal, Marshal of the Fleet, or Marshal of the Air are lifelong appointments. Consequently, these officers fall under the protection already provided in Article 199(3). The proposed amendment merely clarifies and reinforces this immunity, extending it across all courts when such an appointment is made. If action is ever required against such individuals, it can only occur through impeachment under Article 47”, he explained.
When asked why PTI was raising alarms over these amendments, he stated the sole purpose of constitutional immunity is to prevent state institutions from becoming tools of political revenge and to ensure continuity, stability, and impartial decision-making. PTI, is habitual to misguide the public through false propaganda, spreading baseless claims to fuel political polarization. He said that amendment does not introduce new protections; it only elaborates on existing constitutional principles to avoid manipulation but despite this reality, politically motivated groups and anti-state elements are attempting to mislead the public with sensationalized narratives.
