Islamabad: The trial of those responsible for the violence on May 9 should not start in military courts without first telling the Supreme Court (SC), according to Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial. He said this as the six member bench, which also included Justices Ijazul Ahsan, Munib Akhtar, Yahya Afridi, Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, and Ayesha A. Malik, commenced hearing a series of appeals contesting the military trials of civilians. At the hearing this morning. According to petitioner Aitzaz Ahsan’s attorney, Latif Khosa, everything that was happening in the nation at the time during the rule of former military dictator Ziaul Haq.
“You can’t compare the present era with the era of Ziaul Haq. This is not Ziaul Haq’s era nor is martial law imposed in the country. Even if a martial law-like situation arises, we will intervene,” CJP Bandial said.
CJP Bandial said the SC should be informed before military trials of civilians begin. “The trial of the accused in military court’s should not begin without informing the SC,” he said.
At the previous hearing, the apex court had provided another opportunity to Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan to seek fresh instructions from the government about the provision of appeal against the sentence to be awarded by military courts to those found guilty of May 9 violence and arson.
The observations came when the AGP said the government was willing to follow any suggestions to improve the process of trial by military courts if the SC issued directions to ensure provision of appeal against convictions and that the sentence should be awarded with reasons.
At the outset of the hearing, AGP Awan came to the rostrum and said that the apex court had issued him directives at the last hearing. He said that he had spoken about the “organised” plan behind the violent events of May 9.
“From the video clips shown in court, it is evident that a lot of people were involved in the events of May 9,” he said. “Despite the large number, after exercising caution, 102 people were pinpointed for court martial,” he said.
He reiterated that such an incident had occurred in the country for the very first time. He said that an airbase was attacked in Mianwali, adding that it could also have taken place at the ordnance factory.
“We have to prevent such incidents [from taking place] in the future,” the AGP said. “There is a difference between a civil crime and a crime committed by a civilian,” Awan said.
At one point, Justice Naqvi asked how it was decided who would be tried in military courts and who wouldn’t. Awan said that offences under Section 2(1)(d) of the Army Act would be tried in military courts.
“Is the Army Act outside the bounds of fundamental human rights?” asked Justice Afridi. The AGP responded in the affirmative, saying that fundamental rights were not applicable on the Army Act.
Awan argued that there was mention of the Army Act being applicable to civilians even before the 21st Amendment.
“From your arguments, it appears as if fundamental rights have ended,” Justice Akhtar remarked. He then proceeded to ask whether Parliament could amend the Army Act, to which the AGP replied in the affirmative.
“The law should be in context of fundamental rights,” Justice Akhtar said. “Your argument is that it is the state’s will to give or not give fundamental rights.”
