After dissolving a seven-member bench, a six-member Supreme Court panel began hearing arguments on Monday against civilians’ trials in military courts.
New SC bench resumes hearing of military courts: The supreme court’s seven-member bench was disbanded after Justice Mansoor Ali Shah withdrew from hearing cases involving reservations made by the federal government.
Justices Ijazul Ahsan, Munib Akhtar, Yahya Afridi, Mazahir Ali Akbar Naqvi, and Ayisha Malik make up the bench under Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial’s leadership.
Hamid Khan Advocate entered the courtroom and stated, “Our petition has not yet been assigned a number.” He continued, “One of our arguments in the petition related to the military court.
You have included a number of arguments in your petition, so why don’t you alter it, CJP Bandial suggested. Hamid Khan stated, “I will solely focus on the argument with reference to military courts. CJP responded, “We will investigate the case later. He continued, “We are emerging from a setback; other ploys are being employed instead of the constitution or law in this matter; these practises will do no good.
Former Chief Justice Jawad S. Khawaja’s attorney filed written arguments in court.
Salman Akram Raja, the attorney for petitioner Junaid Razzaque, claimed during his client’s son’s case in military court. “Only a judge posted under Article 175 could conduct trial,” the attorney stated.
“The FPLE case decision says that the principle of the division of powers was not clear,” the attorney stated. Justice Ayisha Malik asked how the FPLE situation relates to this case. The Justice Malik questioned, “I will reiterate my earlier question as to how section 2 of the Army Act applied.”
“Justice Munib Akhtar Raises Questions on Military Courts and High Court Jurisdiction”
Justice Munib Akhtar questioned that “even the court martial of the armed forces officers could not be conducted in military courts.” The lawyer retorted, “In the UK and US military officers trials conducted in military tribunals in certain circumstances.
Justice Munib questioned “why a constitutional petition related to military courts could not be filed in a high court.” Slman Akram Raja stated that “the high court could not determine the position of military courts.”
Justice Munib Akhtar questioned, “Are you arguing that even the military officials court martial could not be conducted?” According to attorney Salman Akram Raja, there is no distinction between civilian and military officers in the constitution.
Additionally, “Whether the start of anyone’s trial. It is a theory that when they start, things should go this way or that, according to CJP. The lawyer retorted, “No trial of any person has yet been held in military tribunals.
According to CJP, your case should be handled so that the rights of citizens are not restricted. “The case should not be led to further complications,” he continued.