ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court declared null and void trial of civilians in military courts. Court announced its reserved ruling with 4-1 majority after hearing arguments.

In its short order, apex court said trial of civilians could not be conducted in military courts and Section 2 (D) (I) was unconstitutional. Top court accepted all petitions against military court trials of civilians. Supreme Court also ordered sending cases of May 9 accused to civil courts. 

It further said trial of 103 accused charged with May 9 events could only be conducted in ciriminal courts. Justice Yahya Afridi differed with majority opinion.  Earlier, five-member bench, headed by Justice Ijazul Ahsan started hearing case for which notices had been issued to parties concerned. Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Ayesha A. Malik are part of bench. Apex court heard same case on August 3 last.

On July 21, former Chief Justice of Supreme Court, Umar Ata Bandial had issued directions that without informing apex court, civilians trials should not be initiated in military courts and responsible persons would be summoned in case of order violation. It may be recalled that 13 petitions had been filed against military courts.

Petitioners are former CJP Jawwad S. Khawaja, senior counsel Aitzaz Ahsan, Karamat Ali, Zaman Khan Vardag, Junaid Razzaq, Supreme Court Bar Association, PTI Chief, Hafeezullah Khan Niazi, retired Lt Col Inamul Rahim and Naeemullah Qureshi.  There are fresh applications requesting court to urge military authorities to expedite their trial under Army Act. Applicants include Ijazul Haq, Muhammad Rashid, Abdul Sattar, Rashid Ali, Muhammad Abdullah, Umer Muhammad, Hassan Shakir and Faisal Irshad.

Law enforcement agencies took 102 people into custody following violence on May 9 for attacking civilian as well as military installations, including General Headquarters in Rawalpindi, corps commander’s residence in Lahore, PAF Base Mianwali and an ISI office in Faisalabad.

Earlier, government in an application had told Supreme Court that to safeguard interests of accused, it was imperative that their trials were conducted and concluded so that those who may merit acquittal could be acquitted and those who may merit minor sentences and have already served time in custody could be released.

Moreover, accused, if convicted, could avail remedies available under law. Government had stated that trials of these accused persons would remain subject to outcome of proceedings in instant case.

Published in The Daily National Courier, October, 24 2023

Like Business on Facebook, follow @DailyNCourier on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.