The package of amendments under the umbrella of the Eighth Amendment was passed by the National Assembly in November 1985. It modified as many as 65 articles of the Constitution and incorporated most of the provisions of the Revival of the Constitution of 1973 Order promulgated by military ruler Gen Ziaul Haq.

The amendment, which included the validation of Zia’s martial law, was passed almost under duress, as its passage was tied to the revival of the Constitution and democratic order. The amendment significantly changed the form of government from a parliamentary to a quasi-presidential one. Although the National Assembly was elected in 1985 on a non-party basis and was still under the shadow of martial law, it extensively debated the amendments for 41 days and even managed to amend 18 articles of the Constitution included in the amendment.

The second major exercise of wholesale amendments to the Constitution was undertaken during the rule of another military dictator, Gen Pervez Musharraf, who, following in Zia’s footsteps, made the passage of the 17th Amendment and validation of his unconstitutional acts a condition for lifting military rule. The 17th Amendment incorporated the Legal Framework Order, 2002, promulgated by Musharraf, which had amended almost 29 Articles of the Constitution. The National Assembly elected in 2002 passed the 17th Amendment in December 2003, after more than a year of political wrangling between Musharraf’s supporters and opponents.

The 18th Amendment passed in 2010 during the PPP’s rule was yet another effort to pass a large package of constitutional amendments. The objectives behind their passage were the restoration of the parliamentary character of the 1973 Constitution, which had been distorted by the 17th Amendment, and to ensure enhanced autonomy for the four provinces, respecting the aspirations of the smaller provinces. The package included a total of 102 amendments, which amended, substituted, added or deleted various provisions of the Constitution.

The Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms held 77 meetings over 10 months, spent 385 hours in deliberation, and reviewed 982 public proposals invited by the committee through newspaper advertisements, but all these in-camera proceedings were not a substitute for open debate, which is the essence of a democratic process leading to a durable consensus. The debate in the National Assembly and the Senate lasted for just two and four days, respectively.

Although the PPP did not have the requisite strength in the National Assembly and Senate, the amendment was unanimously passed, which shows that the changes addressed some real problems facing the country at that time and that the PPP had the ability to build broad consensus among different parties.