A nine-judge bench, led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, will convene today to address four petitions challenging the trial of civilians in military courts. The bench includes prominent judges such as Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, and Justice Ijazul Ahsan. These petitions were filed by former Chief Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja, Aitzaz Ahsan, Karamat Ali, and PTI Chairman Imran Khan, arguing for the unconstitutionality of military court trials.
Former Chief Justice Khawaja’s petition highlights the alleged inconsistency between Section 2(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Pakistan Army Act and the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. He argues that these sections should be deemed void and struck down. As an interim measure, the petition seeks the suspension of proceedings against civilians based on these sections or, alternatively, a restraint on military courts from passing final orders against civilians.
Another group of petitioners, represented by counsel Faisal Siddiqi, comprises five members of civil society who deem the trial of civilians in military courts, in connection with the May 9 violence, as illegal. Aitzaz Ahsan, a former law minister and a leading figure in the 2007 lawyers’ movement, aims to prevent the trial of thousands of civilians implicated in the May 9 violence from being conducted in military courts. He emphasizes that civilians should be tried in lawfully established courts of criminal jurisdiction.
PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s petition seeks a declaration against the arrest, investigation, and trial of civilians during peacetime under the Pakistan Army Act (PAA) 1952 and the Official Secrets Act 1923.
Controversial Views on Ex-CJP’s Approach:
Prime Minister’s Special Adviser on Accountability, Irfan Qadir, has expressed strong disapproval of former Chief Justice Khawaja’s decision to challenge the trial of civilians in military courts. Qadir argues that it is unprecedented for a former chief justice to appear as a litigant before the court where he previously served as the top judge.
Qadir cited Article VI of the Code of Conduct for superior court judges, emphasizing that judges should avoid being involved in litigation or matters that may lead to litigation. He stated that a judge should not utilize their position to gain an undue advantage. Qadir believes that the ex-CJP’s decision to become a litigant in such a case is inappropriate and may influence judges who were elevated on his recommendation.
Qadir further questioned why the validity of the Pakistan Army Act, which has been in existence for 70 years, is being challenged now. He believes that it is not suitable for a former chief justice to engage in litigation before the apex court in this manner.
Public Interest and Implications:
The hearing of the petitions challenging the trial of civilians in military courts by the nine-judge bench has garnered significant public interest. The outcome of this case will not only determine the constitutionality of military court trials but also have far-reaching implications for the protection of fundamental rights and the rule of law in Pakistan. The decision will set a precedent for future cases involving the trial of civilians in military courts, establishing guidelines and boundaries for their jurisdiction.
Additionally, it will contribute to the ongoing discourse surrounding the balance between national security concerns and the preservation of individual rights. The public eagerly awaits the court’s verdict, hoping for a just and fair resolution that upholds the principles of justice and ensures the proper administration of justice for all citizens.
Read More: 7 Member SC Bench Resumes Hearing on Military Trials
The nine-judge bench, headed by CJP Umar Ata Bandial, will hear the petitions challenging the trial of civilians in military courts. The outcome of this crucial case will have far-reaching implications for the legal system and the rights of individuals in Pakistan. Despite reservations expressed by the Prime Minister’s Special Adviser on Accountability, the court is set to address the constitutional validity of military court trials and the rights of civilians involved. The proceedings today will play a pivotal role in shaping the future of military court trials and ensuring justice is served in accordance with the Constitution.
