ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court’s constitutional bench on Friday conditionally allowed military courts to pronounce reserved verdicts of civilians who were still in custody for their alleged involvement in last year’s May 9 riots.
Passing directives at the end of Friday’s hearing, Justice Aminuddin Khan, who is heading the constitutional bench, said, “Suspects who can be accorded concessions in their sentences, should be given so and released. Suspects who cannot be released should be moved to jails once their sentence has been pronounced,” he added.
The development came as a seven-judge bench resumed hearing a case pertaining to the trial of more than 100 civilians for their alleged role in attacks on army installations during the riots that followed ex-premier Imran Khan’s arrest on May 9, 2023.
The bench was led by Justice Aminuddin and included Justices Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Naeem Akhtar Afghan, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Musarrat Hilali and Shahid Bilal Hassan.
In a widely praised ruling last year, a five-member SC bench — comprising Justices Ijazul Ahsan, Munib Akhtar, Yahya Afridi, Syed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Ayesha Malik had unanimously declared that trying the accused civilians in military courts violated the Constitution.
The apex court had declared that the accused would not be tried in military courts but in criminal courts of competent jurisdiction established under the ordinary or special law of the land.
However, on December 13 last year, in a 5-1 majority verdict, the SC conditionally suspended its own Oct 23 ruling — albeit by a different bench — pending a final judgement as it heard a set of intra-court appeals (ICAs).
Earlier in March, a six-member SC bench had also conditionally allowed military courts to pronounce reserved verdicts in the cases. It had also modified its Dec 13 injunction, ordering that military courts could commence trials but they would not convict or acquit any suspect until the pendency of government-instituted ICAs.
Contradictory to Friday’s order, the bench on Monday had rejected the government’s request to allow military courts to pronounce verdicts in completed trials, with Justice Hilali noting it would imply the court’s acceptance of the military courts’ jurisdiction to try civilians.
In the same hearing, the bench had questioned the rationale behind handing over May 9 cases to military courts, asking whether anti-terrorism courts (ATCs) had issued speaking orders explaining their reasons before doing so.
Yesterday, questions about the legitimacy of civilians’ military trials in light of Article 8 were the highlight of the hearing, with Justice Mandokhel asking how the Pakistan Army Act (PAA) 1952 could be applied to someone who was not part of the army.
