January 14, 2025
By Rana Malhi
ISLAMABAD
A seven-member larger constitutional bench of the Supreme Court (SC) of Pakistan, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan, resumed hearing on Tuesday, for the Federal Government’s plea against the SC’s stay on military trials of civilians.
Advocate Khawaja Haris, the counsel for the Ministry of Defense, referred to the apex court’s landmark Liaquat Hussain case, which addressed the trial of civilians in military courts for civil crimes. He explained that the fundamental question in the case was what circumstances was the military trial of a civilian permissible.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail noted that a connection with an army officer and committing an offence against the Army are two separate matters. He further stated that determining the link between the accused and the crime is essential.
Advocate Haris elaborated that the “connection” implies a direct link between an individual and the institution or incident, not merely an association with a person or property.
“If an ordinary person steals for their personal gain, will they be tried in a military court?” Justice Musarrat Hilali posed the question to Haris.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar clarified that incidents such as apprehending foreign spies fall under the Official Secrets Act.
Justice Mandokhail referenced the F. B. Ali case, mentioning that it involved allegations of a conspiracy amongst individuals of an institution, emphasizing the need to establish a link between persons of interest.
Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi described the F. B. Ali Case as one from the martial law era, during the tenure of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto as a civilian Chief Martial Law Administrator, and that it was framed in an attempt to remove Bhutto. Justice Rizvi also noted that the Constitution was enacted after the end of the martial law of the period, however Advocate Haris pointed out that the court ruling did not mention the imposition of an emergency.
Regarding the May 9 protests, the bench questioned how many protesters were unaware of their actions.
Justice Rizvi questioned how the May 9 rioters were able to reach the Corps Commander House in Lahore without any weapons, and termed the incident a security failure.
In response, Advocate Haris stated that the allegations against the protesters were related to property damage, and no military officer was tried in the incident. He further argued that under the Army Act, an offense is established only if a military officer files a complaint or is involved. Furthermore, the law has existed since 1967 and the trials of civilians in military courts is not a new phenomenon.
Advocate Haris also stated that the Ministry of Defense will present details of the May 9 protestors.
The court adjourned further hearing for Wednesday, January 15.