Pakistan's Supreme Court Dismisses Full Court Plea for Military Court Civilian Trials

Court Rejects Full Hearing, Raises Concerns Over Civilian Rights in Military Trials

In a recent development, the Supreme Court of Pakistan rejected a plea requesting the constitution of a full court to address a series of petitions challenging the trial of civilians in military courts. Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial announced the verdict, indicating that a full court would not be available until September. This decision comes amid a backdrop of ongoing legal proceedings and concerns about the rights of civilians facing trial in military courts.

Background and Context

The trial of civilians in military courts has been a contentious issue in Pakistan, particularly following the arrests of individuals involved in the May 9 riots. The government's decision to conduct military court trials for those accused of attacking military installations sparked debate and criticism from various quarters.

Several notable figures, including PTI Chairman Imran Khan, legal expert Aitzaz Ahsan, and civil society members such as Karamat Ali, raised concerns about the constitutionality of these military trials. They argued that the trials in military courts violated fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, specifically challenging Section 2(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Pakistan Army Act.

Plea for Full Court Hearing

Karamat Ali, represented by lawyer Faisal Siddiqi, submitted a plea to the Supreme Court, urging the formation of a full court for a comprehensive hearing of the petitions. Ali's plea emphasized that only a judgment from a full court could effectively counter any potential attempts to undermine the outcome of the current petition and related cases. The plea invoked Order 33, Rule 6 of the Supreme Court Rules 1980.

The Verdict and Chief Justice's Comments

Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, along with a six-member bench, reserved the verdict on Ali's plea and subsequently rejected it. The Chief Justice cited various factors, including ongoing court holidays, judges' other engagements, and the precedent of dissolving other benches to form a full court on previous occasions. The Chief Justice stated that a full court would not be available until September.

Concerns About Military Court Trials

During the proceedings, concerns were raised about the rights of civilians facing trial in military courts. Justice Muneeb Akhtar questioned the applicability of military court trials to civilians, highlighting that military personnel, who may not have basic human rights, are tried in military courts. This raised questions about how civilians, who possess human rights, could be subjected to military court proceedings.

Attorney General's Response and Adjournment

Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan informed the court that the matter of granting the right of appeal to individuals facing military court trials was being discussed with the Cabinet Committee on Law. The Attorney General emphasized the need to consult the adjutant general and consider various issues related to the legislation on granting the right of appeal.

The Chief Justice directed the Attorney General to continue presenting arguments in the next hearing, which was adjourned until the following day, August 3.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Pakistan's rejection of the plea for a full court hearing on the constitutionality of military court trials for civilians underscores the complex legal and constitutional issues at stake. The ongoing debate over the rights of civilians and the use of military courts continues to be a significant legal and societal concern in Pakistan. As the legal proceedings unfold, the implications for the justice system and individual rights remain subjects of close scrutiny.