Arson, siege, vandalism have become fashionable: SC judge
Salman Akram Raja reveals families of accused afraid to challenge military trials
The Supreme Court, during a hearing on intra-court appeals against the nullification of military court trials for civilians, witnessed critical remarks from Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi and other judges on Tuesday.
A seven-member constitutional bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan, is reviewing the case, which has sparked nationwide legal debate.
During the hearing, the counsel for one of the convicts, Salman Akram Raja argued that according to the main decision, courts cannot be established outside Article 175.
Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi commented on the May 9 riots, stating that arson, siege, and vandalism have become "fashionable". He highlighted that the footage of the riots, including the attack on the Lahore Corps Commander House, was widely aired on television.
"Has there ever been an attack on a Corps Commander House anywhere in the world?" he questioned, drawing parallels to incidents in Bangladesh and Syria.
Justice Jamal Mandokhel remarked that breaking into the house of a civilian is also a crime. He also raised concerns about the accused individuals, questioning why they did not challenge their transfer to military courts. "Wasn’t this negligence on their part?" he asked.
Salman Akram Raja, the counsel for one of the convicted civilians, argued that no court could be established outside Clause 3 of Article 175 of the Constitution. He further demanded that this clause should apply to army officers as well. Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan responded that if any military officer's case came up, they would examine the matter accordingly.
“You are quoting the example of India where the law was amended through parliament. Why do you want to get the work that is supposed to be done by parliament done from the Supreme Court?” the judge questioned.
Justice Mandokhel also expressed concerns about the role of parliament, stating, "The matters being debated here are for parliament to decide." He stressed that protecting fundamental rights is the judiciary’s duty, but someone must appear before us for violation of fundamental rights.
He also questioned whether military courts have the jurisdiction to review human rights violations.
Fear among families of accused
Salman Akram Raja revealed that families of the accused were afraid to challenge military trials. "Before filing a high court petition, I would receive calls from the families pleading, 'Please don't file the case, our house will not be saved,'" he disclosed.
He emphasized that 10 accused individuals had hired him to contest their trials but were hesitant due to security concerns.
The additional attorney general assured the court that details on the jurisdiction of military courts would be provided in the next hearing. The case has been adjourned until tomorrow.
