The session, chaired by National Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq, began with Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar presenting the bill.

Opposition lawmakers raised slogans at various points during the proceedings.

Responding to the criticism, the law minister assured the House that the legislation did not contradict the Quran and Sunnah.

He said the law included four amendments and is aimed solely to protect the rights of non-Muslim minorities and “should not be politicised”.

During the debate, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (F) chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman cautioned that such laws should be introduced carefully to prevent misuse.

He demanded that the House should be taken into confidence on why the bill was being introduced.

Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan said laws should be made to protect minorities while ensuring that no legislation contradicts Islamic teachings.

Barrister Gohar called for a comprehensive debate on the bill to ensure maximum transparency.

JUI-F Senator Kamran Murtaza raised objections to certain sections of the bill, claiming that these changes could affect the existing powers of the courts.

Law Minister Tarar clarified that the powers of the judiciary would remain intact and agreed to accommodate proposals regarding granting or withdrawing suo motu powers from the commission.

Maulana Fazlur Rehman warned the House to remain vigilant, saying: “The law minister may not be aware of the trickery of Qadianis. They exploit such provisions and then walk away. We should avoid opening this Pandora’s box.”

Opposition figures Allama Raja Nasir Abbas and PPP leader Abdul Qadir Patel also voiced reservations.

Opposing the bill, PPP’s Patel said, “We will be held accountable for many things on the Day of Judgment. I agree with Maulana Fazlur Rehman.”

He added that he would resist anything that affected the sanctity of the Holy Prophet (PBUH), urging the law minister to “exercise caution”.

Following this, the speaker initiated voting as per House rules. Patel walked out of the chamber during the process.

When Speaker Ayaz Sadiq called for a verbal vote, the “no” response sounded louder twice.

However, the final count showed 160 votes in favour of the bill and 79 against.

During clause-by-clause approval, JUI-F’s proposal to remove the commission’s suo motu powers and its objection to Section 35 were accepted.