SC Judge Questions Military Court Officers' Experience in Issuing Death Sentences
Hilali raises concerns over military trials for May 9 cases involving ATA, PPC provisions
By Sohail Rashid
Posted on: January 10, 2025 | The Largest English Digital News Network
Stay Connected
Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and WhatsApp for real-time updates!
Supreme Court's Hearing on Military Court Trials
The Supreme Court's constitutional bench, led by Justice Aminuddin, continued to hear appeals against civilian trials in military courts. Defence Ministry lawyer Khawaja Haris was unable to conclude his arguments, leading to an adjournment until Monday.
Military Courts and Special Laws: A Point of Contention
Justice Musarat Hilali revisited the 1999 plane conspiracy involving former President Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf, questioning why the case did not fall under military jurisdiction. Khawaja Haris clarified that hijacking is not covered under the Army Act, rendering a military trial impossible in such cases.
She pointed out the gravity of the incident, asking, “How could a person not on the plane hijack it?” Khawaja Haris further argued that special laws like the Army Act have distinct procedures and evidence standards.
Can Military Officers Deliver Fair Justice?
Justice Jamal Mandokhel expressed concerns over the adequacy of military court procedures, suggesting that crimes like hijacking or murder could be included in the Army Act with a parliamentary majority. He questioned whether military officers conducting trials had the necessary experience to deliver death sentences.
Justice Hilali raised another concern: “How can an officer who did not conduct the trial decide on sentencing?” She highlighted inconsistencies in verdict writing and sought clarification on the military court process.
Military Court Process Under Scrutiny
Legal Representation: Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi assured that suspects could hire lawyers of their choice. Additionally, military courts appoint a lawyer and an officer as a "friend" for the accused.
Verdict Writing: Haris noted that the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch assists in drafting military court verdicts.
General Perception: Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan remarked on the common belief that military court trials mainly focus on delivering punishment.
This case continues to raise important questions about the transparency and fairness of military court procedures.
For Related Articles:
Supreme Court Seeks Clarity on Military Trial of May 9 Rioters
Visit Watts News for the latest updates.
