SC judge asks whether civilian can be court-martialled on basis of his crime

Justice Jamal Mandokhel of the constitutional bench (CB) of the Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday asked whether a civilian could be tried in a military court on the basis of the crime he had committed, reported 24NewsHD TV channel.

During the hearing of intra-court appeals filed against declaring the trial of civilians in military courts null and void, the judge asked, “What were the powers of a military court under the Army Act?”  

A seven-member bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, heard the appeals. 

Salman Akram Raja, counsel for the May 9 convicts, said that the Brigadier (r) FB Ali case had been decided in light of the 1962 constitution. “Even in that case, the court had ruled that civilians could be court-martialled provided their fundamental rights were protected.”

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar asked how FB Ali was tried in a military court when he was a civilian.  

Raja replied that the court had said in its judgment that there was no violation of basic rights in Ali’s trial. “The court had ruled that there was nothing wrong with the Army Act introduced through the promulgation of an ordinance.”  

The counsel said if the bench upheld the verdict given by Justice Ayesha A. Malik, it would be deemed a victory for the May 9 convicts. 

Raja said he was surprised that Ali was handed the punishment by a military court on the orders of General Ziaul Haq wished. “But when the same Gen Zia went on to become the army chief, he granted amnesty to Ali.”

Justice Mandokhel remarked that the late military dictator might have thought, at a later stage, that he was wrong. 

Reporter: Amanat Gishkori