April 7, 2025
By Rana Malhi
ISLAMABAD
The Supreme Court resumed the hearing of the intra-court appeals filed against a verdict that had nullified the trial of civilians in military courts.
A seven-member constitutional bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin, has been hearing the case, resuming hearing on Monday.
During the hearing, the Ministry of Defence’s counsel, Khawaja Haris, began his rebuttal by stating that he wished to draw the court’s attention to certain judicial verdicts. According to him, the decisions of former Chief Justice Saeed-uz-zaman Siddiqui and other judges are significant in this context and merit reference.
Khawaja Haris argued before the court that if a civilian damages a military installation or, for example, steals a tank, then such a person falls under the jurisdiction of the ‘Pakistan Army Act’.
At this, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail inquired on what basis a First Information Report (FIR) is registered for a criminal act. He noted that the fundamental question in this case is that of the trial itself, not merely the registration of an FIR. Justice Mandokhail stated that it is the prerogative of the parliament to decide where such trials should take place.
He further added that the court wants to understand the procedure for FIR registration, who conducts the investigation, and under which legal code all these actions are undertaken.
The counsel for the Ministry of Defence maintained that under the Army Act, the armed forces themselves have the authority to arrest a civilian. To this, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar pointed out that an FIR must exist prior to any arrest.
Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi stated that when a person is arrested, it is mandatory to present them before the relevant magistrate.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, referencing Section 2-D of the Army Act, remarked that a person is only considered an accused once formal charges are brought against them.
In his arguments, Khawaja Haris stated that the Constitution of Pakistan itself grants a special and unique jurisdiction for courts-martial. Justice Mandokhail questioned that if, according to Khawaja Haris, military courts do not fall under the purview of Article 175 of the Constitution, then under which article do these courts function? He said that this required clarification.
Khawaja Haris responded that there are multiple judicial precedents regarding courts-martial, which can be referred to in order to understand the matter. To this, Justice Mandokhail remarked that the role of courts is solely to determine whether a trial is being conducted in accordance with the Constitution or not.
He further noted that combating terrorism is not the responsibility of the courts, but rather of the parliament. He said if courts begin to consider whether their verdicts will increase or reduce terrorism, they will never be able to reach a decision.
The hearing on the intra-court appeals against the verdict nullifying the trial of civilians in military courts was adjourned until tomorrow. The Ministry of Defence’s counsel, Khawaja Haris, will continue his arguments tomorrow.