0

The recent Constitutional Amendments in Pakistan brought this question to my mind. Despite so many alarming clauses in the amendments, Govt has also pre-fixed the reaction by the Supreme Court by removing its right of suo moto or even being allowed to take up constitutional matters.

So, now the way it stands, it seems like constitutional amendments can only be challenged in the special constitutional bench. My question is, can these (or any other subsequent) amendments be challenged elsewhere?

Let's suppose, some other day, an amendment comes that these benches also don't have the right to challenge the amendments, will it mean that govt can introduce any amendment they would like, no matter how crazy it is?

Improve this question
2
  • 2
    Where does the constitutional bench's authority come from? If it comes from the constitution, then a change to the constitution can take it away.
    – Barmar
    Commented Oct 22 at 16:43
  • Very few countries permit constitutional amendments to be challenged in any way.
    – ohwilleke
    Commented Oct 22 at 19:01

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3

The German constitution ranks constitutional provisions into the core values protected by the so-called Ewigkeitsgarantie (eternity promise, §79(3)), and others which may be changed by a sufficient supermajority of both chambers. The decision if a change affects the core values, or merely clarifies details, is left to the constitutional court. So a constitutional amendment could be found unconstitutional.

Improve this answer
2
  • Well, it's not any different from the situation here too. I am curious whats the procedure for constitutional court appointments?
    – Failed Scientist
    Commented Oct 22 at 6:32
  • 1
    @FailedScientist, that could be a separate question if you want a comparative answer, but for Germany the current constitutional requirement is that half are elected by the federal legislature, half by the states' representatives. This happens according to law and rules of procedure of the two houses. There is talk about making the court more "resilient" by putting more of the laws and rules of procedure governing this election into the constitution itself, so they are harder to change.
    – o.m.
    Commented Oct 22 at 15:22
1

Generally countries can enact anything they want to as long as the process is proper. An amendment that ejected everyone named Bob would be fine as long as it was done through the proper methods. Unless another country wants to enforce outside values through diplomacy or arms, countries can enact whatever they want.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .