The Supreme Court of Pakistan has reserved its verdict on petitions challenging the military trials of civilians. The trials were initiated following violent protests in the country after the arrest of PTI Chairman Imran Khan on May 9. The five-member bench, headed by Justice Ijazul Ahsan and including Justices Munib Akhtar, Yayha Afridi, Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, and Ayesha A. Malik, heard the petitions.
Previously, a six-judge bench, including former Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, was hearing the case. However, after Justice Bandial’s retirement, the bench was reduced to five judges. On Sunday, nine accused facing trials under the Army Act requested an early conclusion to their cases by the military courts, expressing their faith in the military authorities to deliver justice.
After the violent attacks on military installations on May 9, a total of 102 individuals were arrested for their involvement. The attacks targeted both civilian and military locations, including the General Headquarters in Rawalpindi, the corps commander’s residence in Lahore, PAF Base Mianwali, and an office of the Inter-Services Intelligence in Faisalabad.
During the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan argued that a constitutional amendment was not necessary for the military trials of civilians. He highlighted that military courts fulfill all the requirements of criminal courts and that the verdicts would provide detailed reasoning. The Attorney General also mentioned that military courts could handle cases involving attacks on restricted areas or buildings.
However, Justice Ahsan questioned the need for a constitutional amendment to try terrorists but not civilians, seeking clarification on the argument. Awan clarified that a constitutional amendment was not required if the accused had a direct link to the armed forces, adding that the suspects would be tried under the Official Secrets Act.
Awan assured the court that the military trials of the May 9 suspects would follow the same procedures as criminal courts, ensuring a fair trial as per the Constitution’s Article 10-A. He also noted that the verdicts could be appealed in the high courts and ultimately the Supreme Court. The hearing also discussed previous cases tried by military courts, which included civilians, foreigners, and those facilitating terrorists.
The case background revealed that the hearing was postponed in August, with ex-Chief Justice Bandial stating that the court did not want to see the Pakistan Army aiming their guns at civilians, as their role was to defend the country and its people. The trials of civilians in military courts have faced criticism from human rights groups and politicians who believe it undermines civilian supremacy.
According to the recently upheld Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023, cases involving the interpretation of the Constitution under Article 184(3) should be heard by a bench of at least five Supreme Court judges. Any decision made by this bench can be challenged, and appeals can be filed within 30 days from the court’s order, which must be fixed within 14 days. The full court request by the government was previously rejected by the Supreme Court.
An application was filed by Junaid Razzaq, urging the court to expedite the hearing of military courts’ cases as he had been informed that the trials of civilians had already started, violating the court’s directive to seek prior permission. The applicant emphasized the need for an early hearing to prevent irreparable harm.