ISLAMABAD: The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan on Wednesday why the Army Act was not applied in the cases related to the 2014 Army Public School (APS) attack.
The constitutional bench, led by Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, heard an intra-court appeal challenging the decision to try civilians in military courts. Khawaja Haris appeared on behalf of the Ministry of Defence during the proceedings.
During the hearing, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail questioned the necessity of amending the Constitution to permit military trials for terrorism, pointing to the existing nexus between civilian crimes and military courts.
He also asked why such trials were not conducted previously, despite the existence of the Army Act.
The defence ministry’s lawyer, Khawaja Haris, argued that the nature of the crime determines whether the trial is held in a civilian or military court.
He emphasised that if a civilian crime is linked to the armed forces, it falls under the jurisdiction of military courts.
Justice Mandokhail, however, suggested that the perpetrator’s intent should be considered to determine if the crime was against national interests.
Khawaja Haris clarified that military courts could try terrorist acts linked to religious or terrorist groups under the Army Act, with or without constitutional amendments.
Justice Mandokhail inquired about the handling of significant cases, like the 2014 Army Public School (APS) attack, under the existing legal framework.
Khawaja Haris stated that the APS attack was linked to the military but was not directly tried under military courts.
He noted that the constitutional amendment covered additional crimes beyond military duties.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar added that the court was focused on assessing the constitutional status of the law, not the nature of specific crimes.
Khawaja Haris argued that if the Supreme Court upheld Sections 21D and 2D2 of the Army Act, challenges to military courts should be dismissed.
The bench also referenced the 21st Constitutional Amendment, which allowed military trials for terrorism cases after the APS attack.
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan remarked that the amendment had been a subject of parliamentary debate and applied judicial reasoning, while Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi noted the emotional context in which the amendment had been approved.
Khawaja Haris defended the role of the parliament in passing the amendment, acknowledging the crucial role played by former Senate Chairman in its approval.
The constitutional bench then adjourned the hearing till Thursday (tomorrow).
