ISLAMABAD: The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court once again resumed hearing on the trial of civilians in military courts. A seven-member constitutional bench headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan presided over the hearing that considered the scope of the Army Act.
Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi inquired whether there was a trial for the involvement of any military officer in the May 9 incidents. “How did people reach the corps commander’s house without weapons? The invasion of the corps commander house was a failure of security. After all, there has to be a mastermind. Who was behind this conspiracy?” Justice Rizvi said.
Also read: SC’s Constitutional Bench debates civilian trials in military courts
Ministry of Defense’s lawyer Khawaja Haris gave arguments in response and said that trial of the conspirators or of masterminds in this case will also be held in the military court.
Addressing Khawaja Haris, Justice Jamal Mandokhail said that the defense’s case is entirely dependent on the FB Ali case. Justice Mandokhail said, “Both retired and serving officers were involved in the FB Ali case. The allegation was of collusion with some people within the institution. It is necessary to prove the participation of someone from within the institution.”
Justice Mandokhail said to the counsel, “You and I have a relationship. However, simply having this relationship will not make us complicit in any of your cases. If a crime is committed, it is important to establish collusion in that case.”
He continued, “In the case at hand, who is accused of stopping the army from doing their job? Under the Army Act, the crime would only have been committed if an official complains or is found involved.”
Khawaja Haris responded that whoever breaks the discipline of the army will have go face trial in the military court. “Even in the FB Ali case, the people on whom the case was tried were retired,” Khawaja Haris said, adding, “Even during peace times, interfering in the military affairs leads to a trial in the military courts.”
The defense’s counsel said, “The trial of the civilian is not happening suddenly. The law has been in place since 1967.” Khawaja Haris said, “If I go to a defense agency and steal a gun from there, I will also be tried [in their court]”.
Justice Mandokhail inquired that how will the insider relationship be proved in such a case of gun theft? Khawaja Haris said that stealing the gun with which the soldier was supposed to fight is equivalent to stopping the soldier from working.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar inquired where the FIR of gun theft will be registered in this case. Justice Mandokhail added to the query saying that whether attacking an army convoy is also a violation of discipline? Justice Musarrat Hilali said that if a soldier has a conflict with a civilian at a check post, is it also a violation of discipline? Justice Mandokhail said that with this much expansion in the scope of the Army Act, anyone can come under it.
Also read: Military courts pardon 19 convicts linked to May 9 incidents
Justice Hilali also mentioned that during the events of May 9 many people were just walking by. “They did not know where they were going,” she said.
To this Khawaja Haris said that all such people should not be tried in the military court. He said that he will present the details of the accused in the court.
The Constitutional Bench adjourned the hearing of the case till tomorrow (January 15).