Pakistan and Future

243A. Declaration of war.–

History
This article is a new addition to the constitution. It is interesting to note that in the original constitution of 1973 , the declaration of war was not explicitly specified to be the right of Prime Minister or Cabinet. In the wake of limited Kargil war of 1999 , this article may have some significance.

243A. Declaration of war.–
Notwithstanding anything contained in the Constitution or any other law for the time being in force, no person or authority shall declare war or use Armed Forces against any foreign Government or country without prior approval of the Prime Minister or the Cabinet

Commentry
I believe this is any important and essential amendment , this article also follows the maxim of Winston Churchill that “War is too serious a business to be left on Generals only”. In 1999, the armed forces of Pakistan attacked India in Kargil without the prior permission of the Prime Minister or Cabinet , the matters get more confused in the context of article 243 (1A) which states

243 (1A) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision, the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces shall vest in the President.

This is important to note that the above clause was added by another dictator Gen Zia in 1985 and it was not included in the original constitution of Pakistan , instead the original intent of the founders of constitution was expressed in the clause 1 of the same article i.e.

243. Command of Armed Forces.
(1) The Federal Government shall have control and command of the Armed Forces.

Since the control and command of the armed forces lies with the Federal Government , therefore declaration of war which included mobilization of armed forces against the enemy also lies with the Federal Government , however with the introduction of clause 1A , the president became the supreme commander of the armed forces, hence having the implicit authority to declare the war.
In my opinion introduction of Article 243A , will explicitly define the authority of Prime Minister and Cabinet to make a decision of war.

260. Definitions.
History
This one is very interesting article, Article 260 was part of the constitution since 1973, it clarified the meanings of certain terms in the constitution. Let me first give a brief overview why these definitions are important. It is the right of Supreme Court of Pakistan to interpret the constitution in case of any ambiguity or question posed by the federal government about the meaning of any article/clause of the constitution. Supreme Court interprets the constitution based on the letter and spirit of the constitution , this interpretation is usually backed by the precedents from both other countries constitution as well as the original intent of the writers of the constitution. However the writers of the constitution decided to enforce certain meanings for certain terms used in a context. Later on however the dictators decided to use this article to give the opposite meanings to certain terms. This amendment tries to rectify one such problem. Let me quote here the amendment.

(1) In the Constitution, unless the context otherwise requires, the following expressions have the meaning hereby respectively assigned to them, that is to say,

“consultation” shall, save in respect of appointments of Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, mean discussion and deliberation which shall not be binding on the President.

Commentry
Consultation in constitutional parlance means a meaningful discussion in order to reach a consensus. And usually it means a certain binding nature on the person who initiates this consultation. At many places in the constitution the phrase “In consultation with Prime Minister” is used , the decision coming out of such consultation is binding in nature , however this definition nullifies the meaning of consultation , Ironically it also mentions that in case of appointment of Judges of Supreme Court and High Court this will still be binding on President. This definition has far reaching impact on the whole constitution making it presidential in nature. Therefore removal of this definition is imperative and essential.