THIS is with reference to the report ‘Constitutional court dominates political discourse’ (Sept 20). The proposed constitutional amendments have faced significant backlash, with widespread concerns being voiced across various sectors. As such, many legal professionals, in particular, have been expressing their apprehension, citing potential threats to legal stability. The fact is that, if approach-ed through due process and in consultation with the stakeholders, the proposed amendments may well be a move in the right direction. The proposals seek to address concerns surrounding the judicial system, which is currently marked by delays in the dispensation of justice. The proposed constitutional court would share the burden with the Supreme Court (SC), and a swift relief would be expected in the future. The SC has advisory, constitutional and appellate jurisdiction. The pace at which the appellate cases are currently processed is particularly critical. The proposed constitutional court would take care of the first two jurisdictions, leaving the court to focus solely on its appellate jurisdiction. Further, writ petitions under Article 199 will now be entertained by the high courts and the proposed constitutional court. Appeals in such cases will be heard exclusively by the latter. This will settle the cases more efficiently, with a specific time limit imposed to expedite proceedings. Instead of outright rejecting the entire set of proposals, we should acknowledge its merits and support the provisions that align with legal principles. We must keep in mind the suffering of those affected by the current judicial inefficiencies. It is time to focus on reforms that prioritise the people, and ensure efficient dispensation of justice. While the proposals in their current form do have imperfections, they offer an opportunity for positive change, and we should work towards refining the proposals in the interest of the public.