ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Tuesday referenced Gen (r) Bajwa’s extension as part of its discussions during hearing of the military trials case, highlighting it as an instance of legal modifications influenced by judicial intervention.
The court analyzed the bureaucratic missteps involved in the extension process, indicating the legal implications of such decisions.
A seven-member constitutional bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan, resumed the hearing of an intra-court appeals challenging military courts’ jurisdiction over civilians.
During the proceedings, Bajwa’s tenure extension was cited as an example of legal changes driven by the court’s interventions.
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan remarked that the former army chief’s extension had no legal backing at the time and was only formalised after parliamentary legislation, following the Supreme Court’s directives.
Justice Aminuddin Khan recalled the urgency surrounding the case, stating, “At that time, everyone sat together for a single notification. That was our state.”
The case saw lawyers questioning the legal standing of military trials for civilians.
Advocate Uzair Bhandari, representing former Prime Minister Imran Khan, argued that military courts lack trained judges and fail to ensure fair trials.
He noted that under military court proceedings, even the right to appeal is restricted to a mercy plea before the army chief.
Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi challenged this view, pointing to video evidence of attacks on military installations, stating that security in such areas was under army control.
He suggested that military involvement justified trials under the army’s legal framework.
Justice Musarrat Hilali, addressing Bhandari, commented, “You argue one thing, but your client says something else.”
She referenced Khan’s past statements about negotiating only with those holding power.
Bhandari declined to comment on his client’s remarks, maintaining his focus on the case’s legal aspects.
During arguments, references were made to India’s military trial system. Justice Aminuddin Khan noted that Indian law allows appeals to independent tribunals, questioning whether such rights were legislated by Parliament or mandated by the courts.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar pointed to the case of Kulbhushan Jadhav, an Indian national tried under Pakistan’s military justice system.
He reminded the court that Pakistan granted Jadhav appeal rights only after the International Court of Justice’s ruling and subsequent legislation.
Bhandari concluded his arguments, asserting that fundamental rights must be upheld in all legal proceedings.
The court adjourned the case until tomorrow, with lawyer Faisal Siddiqui set to present arguments in the following session.
