Islamabad: The Supreme Court’s constitutional bench has allowed military courts to issue verdicts in the cases of 85 individuals accused of involvement in the May 9 riots, with a condition that these judgments will be subject to the final decision in the pending Supreme Court case.
the bench ruled that individuals eligible for leniency should be released, while those not eligible should be sentenced and transferred to prisons.
Key Developments
- Hearing of Civilian Trials in Military Courts Postponed:
The constitutional bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan, deferred the hearing of the case involving civilians’ trials in military courts until after the winter break. The court also indicated that it would take up the 26th Amendment case in the second week of January. - Arguments Presented:
Defense Ministry’s counsel Khawaja Haris argued that the provisions of the Army Act align with the Constitution. He faced scrutiny from the bench, with Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail questioning the validity of expanding the Army Act to civilians and highlighting its implications for fundamental rights. - Judicial Observations:
Justice Mandokhail emphasized that the Army Act, introduced before the Constitution of 1973, was designed for military personnel and does not guarantee fundamental rights. Justice Musarrat Hilali raised concerns about fairness in trials for civilians under military law. - High Courts’ Appeal Rights Suspended:
The bench decided to suspend the right of appeal in high courts against military court decisions until intra-court appeals are resolved. The appeal period in high courts will commence after the Supreme Court’s final verdict. - Future Hearings:
The court expressed hope to conclude the case on civilian trials in military courts by January and indicated that hearings on petitions against the 26th Amendment would follow shortly after.
Background
The case stems from trials under military courts for civilians accused of attacking military installations during the May 9 riots. The court’s decision to conditionally allow verdicts reflects its aim to balance judicial oversight with ongoing legal processes.
The constitutional bench adjourned the hearing until the first week of January.
