ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan’s Constitutional Bench has been urged to handle intra-court appeals regarding military trials of civilians as review petitions, rather than appeals, following an October 2023 decision by a five-judge Supreme Court panel. This was proposed by Advocate Uzair Karamat Bhandari, representing Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan, during a session on Wednesday.
The seven-member Constitutional Bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan, is examining appeals against a previous ruling that invalidated the military trials of civilians involved in the May 9 unrest. Advocate Bhandari argued that the appeals should focus on correcting any errors made in the earlier judgment, citing the March 2024 decision by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah on the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 as a precedent.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar raised questions about the parameters for potentially modifying the previous ruling, emphasizing the need for respect and decorum in addressing earlier decisions. Justice Aminuddin Khan noted the challenge of judges on the current bench holding differing opinions from the previous panel.
The debate also touched on the role of armed forces in civilian judicial matters, with Mr. Khan’s counsel asserting that military involvement in civilian trials exceeds the scope of Article 245 of the constitution, which limits the military’s judicial functions.
Additionally, the court was asked to consider forming a judicial commission to investigate police inaction during the May 9 violence, as suggested by Sardar Latif Khosa representing Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan. Khosa highlighted the disproportionate number of military trials and convictions, citing reports from the International Commission of Jurists.
The session saw references to international standards, with Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi questioning how frequently other countries, particularly those within the International Commission of Jurists, experience terrorism compared to Pakistan.
The discussions also examined the historical context of military courts and the independence of judiciary as emphasized in Islamic principles. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail challenged the legislative history regarding the Army Act, questioning why no parliament had abolished contentious sections.
As the bench deliberated, Aitzaz Ahsan clarified his support for previous court decisions, distancing himself from any reservations expressed by his counsel Salman Akram Raja about the October 2023 judgment.
The proceedings continue to underscore the complex interplay between military jurisdiction, civilian justice, and constitutional law, as the Supreme Court grapples with these pivotal legal and constitutional issues.
