ISLAMABAD: The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court on Monday reserved its judgment on the intra-court appeal challenging the verdict pertaining to trial the trial of civilians in military courts.
A brief ruling is likely to be released this week following the conclusion of the appeal hearing, said Justice Aminuddin Khan, who is heading the seven-member bench that is hearing the matter.
The seven-judge bench had taken up a set of 38 intra-court appeals (ICAs) moved by the federal and provincial governments as well as the Shuhada Forum Balochistan etc against the SC’s Oct 23, 2023 verdict.
Last year, the apex court’s constitutional bench granted conditional permission to military courts to announce verdicts in cases involving 85 suspects allegedly involved in the May 9, 2023, riots.
In its order, the constitutional bench had said judgments of military courts would be conditional to the top court’s verdict on the cases pending before it.
Subsequently, the military courts sentenced 85 PTI activists to two to 10 years of “rigorous imprisonment” for their involvement in the May 9, 2023, protests, marking the conclusion of trials for those held in military custody over the attacks on army installations and monuments.
Later in January, the military accepted mercy pleas of 19 out of the 67 convicts sentenced in the May 9 riots case on “humanitarian grounds”, the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) said.
The top court, in its unanimous verdict by a five-member bench, on October 23 2023, declared civilians’ trials in military courts null and void after it admitted the petitions challenging the trial of civilians involved in the May 9 riots.
Today’s hearing
During the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan said that between 3pm and 7pm on May 9, attacks were carried out on 39 military installations. Of these, 23 were in Punjab, 8 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and one in Sindh. The entire episode of May 9 was carried out with organised planning.
While presenting arguments, the attorney general said that even if the events of May 9 were a reaction, such actions cannot be condoned. “Our country is not an ordinary one; due to its geography, we constantly face significant threats,” he said.
The attorney general informed the court that disciplinary action was taken by the military over negligence in the Jinnah House attack, and three senior officers were retired without pension and benefits. These included a Lieutenant General, a Brigadier, and a Lieutenant Colonel.
He further said that dissatisfaction was expressed regarding the performance of 14 officers, who will not be considered for future promotions.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail asked whether any criminal proceedings had been initiated against any officers. The attorney general replied that criminal proceedings would have taken place if a crime had been committed; the disciplinary actions were taken for failing to prevent the May 9 incident.
Justice Mandokhail remarked that under the Army Act, criminal punishment must accompany departmental action. The AGP responded that the officers who exercised restraint were the ones subjected to disciplinary action.
The court later reserved its ruling on the intra-court appeal against the verdict barring military trials of civilians.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the head of the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Bench, Justice Aminuddin, said that a short order would be announced later this week.
