Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial on Wednesday constituted a nine-member larger bench to hear petitions against the trial of civilians in military courts.
The larger bench headed by the chief justice will take up the petitions today at 11:45am. Multiple petitions have been filed in the SC after the army indicated that suspects booked in cases pertaining to the May 9 riots – during which several public and private properties, including military installations, were vandalised amid countrywide protests sparked by the arrest of PTI chief Imran Khan – should be tried under army laws, which the government subsequently endorsed.
Petitioners in three of the pleas are the PTI chief himself, veteran politician Aitzaz Ahsan and former CJP Jawwad S. Khawaja.
A fourth plea has been filed by Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research Chief Executive Karamat Ali, former Karachi Metropolitan Corporation administrator Fahim Zaman Khan, Aurat Foundation Director Mahnaz Rahman, educationist Prof Dr AH Nayyar and clinical psychologist and educationist Syed Zulfiqar Hussain Gilani.
The development comes a day after former chief justice Jawwad S Khawaja challenged the coalition government’s decision to hold trials of May 9 rioters in military courts, asking if civilian institutions including the Supreme Court can endorse “militarisation of justice”.
“This case is also about power flowing from the barrel of a gun. It is about the power of the army. The army controls businesses and land. Historically, it has exercised power and influence over our political dispensation. Its power and reach extend far beyond its constitutional role. If not a state within a state, it is regarded as an entity distinct from the government and referred to as the ‘establishment’. “The question for our civilian institutions including this court is whether the militarization of justice will be endorsed,” said a 39-page constitution petition filed through Khwaja Ahmad Hosain advocate.
The former top judge asked if Pakistanis as a nation want to march backwards in time “with banners flying and drums beating to old tunes”. “Or do we see a better tomorrow with public officeholders and institutions operating within constitutionally assigned domains? It is a fundamental question that continues to plague us as a nation. The answer will shape the future,” he added. He said trials of civilians in military courts do not meet international fair trial standards: the right to a public hearing is not guaranteed, there is no right to a reasoned judgment, there are no details about where trials are conducted, and even the details of the charges are kept secret.
“The decision to try civilians by military courts when the civilian courts are functioning is incompatible with the Constitution and a violation of fundamental rights guaranteed therein.” The petitioner noted that all four types of court martial-general court martial, district court martial, summary court martial, and field general court martial-are not impartial or independent tribunals. “The ‘judges’ are all serving officers of the military. They do not have any legal training, security of tenure, or other prerequisites which underpin judicial independence. “All those involved in the proceedings of the court martial are part of and dependent on the executive branch from appointment until retirement,” he added. The petitioner said trials in military courts lack transparency. The hearings are held in private and behind closed doors. Section 93 of the Pakistan Army Act 1952 states, “persons subject to this Act who commits any offence against it may be tried and punished for such offence in any place whatsoever.”
