Islamabad:
On Wednesday, the Constitutional Banc of the Supreme Court rendered the file of military court trials on Wednesday to the defense lawyer, citing the concerns that the examination of his hearing during the appeal hearing could have a Impact on the case against military courts judging civilians.
During the procedure, judge Jamal Khan Mandokhail raised questions concerning the powers of judges who president of military trials. He also asked whether article 175 of the Constitution authorized the place to create military courts.
The bench, led by Judge Amicin Khan, included judges Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Ayesha Malik, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hasan Azhar Naqvi, Musarrat Hilali, Naeem Afghan and Shahid Bilal Hasan.
The court heard an intra-haired appeal against the previous verdict which prevented the military courts from trying civilians.
Representing the Ministry of Defense, lawyer Khwaja Haris argued that if the court examined the issue under article 175, all previous decisions concerning the creation of military courts should be reassessed.
He stressed that the Constitution had enabled the creation of courts and that several other countries also have military courts.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail pointed out that the army manages anti-narcotic issues and, when making a trial against an accused, he consults a high court sessions. He wondered if the military courts could have a similar practice.
Haris argued that the military courts had been kept separated from article 175 in all legal decisions, adding that the Army Act could not be challenged on the basis of fundamental rights.
Juma Jamal Khan Mandokhail expressed his concern in the face of an increasing tendency of public skepticism towards court judgments, declaring that the laity was throwing up more and more about the verdicts issued by benches even of eight members.
Judge Musarrat Hilali deplored that accounts and impressions of social media suggested that judges had political affiliations. “I belong to Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and I question the military tests because of their impact on the inhabitants of my province. But, unfortunately, social media connects me to a political party,” she said .
Judge Hasan Azhar Naqvi wondered if the journalists and relatives of the accused had been authorized to attend the military legal proceedings. In response, Khwaja Haris explained that although the law authorizes access, security problems often prevent journalists and relatives from attending trials.
During the hearing, the defense lawyer submitted military trials to the bench, distributing copies between judges.
However, judge Jamal Khan Mandokhail said that the examination of files at this stage was inappropriate, as this could have an impact on the appeal of the appeal. Subsequently, six judges on the bench returned the files to the defense lawyer.
Judge Mandokhail also noted that the judges leading military trials were subordinate to the authorities, which raises concerns about their independence. However, Khwaja Haris replied that any bias complaint should be supported by evidence.
Judge Mandokhail clarified that he had no doubts or personal objection, but underlined the need to examine the qualifications and impartiality of military trials.
While the hearing has ended, Judge Aminuddin Khan ordered the defense lawyer to finish the arguments by Thursday. In response, Khwaja Haris assured court that he would conclude his submissions within the given period.