Islamabad (Web Desk): The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday reserved its judgment in a consolidated set of intra-court appeals concerning the constitutionality of subjecting civilians to trial before military courts.
The matter was heard by a six-member larger bench headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, which concluded hearings in 38 appeals filed by the federation, the provincial governments, and the Shuhada Forum Balochistan.
The court indicated that a short order would be issued later in the week.
The proceedings arise from a judgment rendered in October 2023 by a five-member bench of the SC, wherein the trial of civilians under the Pakistan Army Act, 1952, in connection with the incidents of 9 May 2023, was declared to be ultra vires the Constitution.
That judgment was delivered unanimously in response to petitions filed against the decision to prosecute civilians allegedly involved in attacks on military installations following political unrest on the said date.
Despite the aforementioned ruling, military courts, prior to the Court’s declaration of invalidity, had adjudicated several cases.
According to publicly available statements issued by the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), a total of 85 individuals associated with the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) were convicted and sentenced to terms ranging between two and ten years of rigorous imprisonment.
In January 2024, the military authorities accepted 19 appeals for clemency on what were described as humanitarian grounds.
During the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP), Mansoor Usman Awan, contended that the events of 9 May did not constitute sporadic or uncoordinated acts of public disorder but rather amounted to deliberate, organised attacks on state institutions.
He submitted that between the hours of 3:00 PM and 7:00 PM on that day, 39 military sites were targeted across the country, including 23 in Punjab, eight in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), and one in Sindh.
According to the AGP, the scale and coordination of these attacks necessitated invocation of special jurisdiction under the Pakistan Army Act.
He further submitted that national security considerations, due to Pakistan’s sensitive geopolitical positioning, justified the recourse to military adjudication in exceptional cases.
Mr Awan also disclosed disciplinary proceedings undertaken within the armed forces in the aftermath of the attacks.
Specifically, he informed the Court that three officers, including a Lieutenant General, a Brigadier, and a Lieutenant Colonel, were forcibly retired without pension or post-retirement benefits due to their failure to prevent the attack on the Jinnah House in Lahore. An additional 14 officers were denied promotion on account of unsatisfactory performance in relation to the same events.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail inquired as to whether criminal prosecutions had been initiated against any of the officers who had failed in their duties.
The AGP stated that no such prosecutions had occurred, as the relevant conduct did not meet the threshold for criminal liability. He clarified that disciplinary action had been taken solely in response to a failure to act, not in relation to any unlawful act committed.
Justice Mandokhail observed that under the provisions of the Pakistan Army Act, internal disciplinary measures do not preclude the possibility of criminal accountability, where warranted.
In reply, the Attorney General reiterated that the disciplinary proceedings were directed only at those who had refrained from action, and that no element of criminality had been established.
Concluding the hearing on the appeals, Justice Aminuddin Khan announced that the matter stood reserved for judgment, and that a short order would be delivered later this week.