Connect with us

Politics

Military trials: AGP seeks a month’s time on matter of right to appeal

Published

on

ISLAMABAD: Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan on Friday requested the Supreme Court for a month on the matter of granting the right of appeal to people to be tried in military courts.

“This matter needs very careful consideration; It has to be done in such a way that the country’s position at the global level is not affected,” the AGP said.

The AGP’s request came during a hearing of identical petitions challenging the government’s decision to conduct trials of civilians in military courts.

The six-member bench comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Ayesha Malik.

Amendments to Army Act

At the start of the hearing, AGP Awan took to the rostrum and reiterated the need for military courts. He also assured the bench that arrests were made very carefully after a thorough investigation.

He further contended that according to the Army Act, those breaking the discipline of civilian forces came under the law.

He then said he wanted to brief the court on the amendments to the Army Act.

However, Justice Akhtar inquired: “Does injuring an army officer amount to preventing him from performing his duty?”

He further slammed the AGP for contradictory statements: “On the one hand, it is stated that the state cannot make any law beyond human rights.

“On the other, you are saying that human rights are not applicable in this particular law.

“I am unable to understand the logic of your argument.”

“After the 21st constitutional amendment, the law of trial in military courts of civilians came into force,” the AGP said.

The CJP then inquired if civilians had been included after the amendment of the Army Act. The AGP confirmed that was the case.

Human rights question

During the hearing, Justice Akhtar asked the AGP: “If parliament wants to include basic human rights in the Army Act tomorrow, can it?”

“Parliament has full power to legislate,” the attorney general responded.

“This would mean that the parliament has the power to grant or not grant basic human rights in the Army Act,” Justice Akhtar probed.

“It is not possible that a parliament today includes fundamental rights in the military act and the next Parliament removes them,” he noted, adding that the law should be absolutely clear.

Justice Ahsan further remarked: “The 21st amendment was made to apply the Army Act to civilians.”

At this, Justice Ayesha contended that human rights were protected by the proposed procedure for trials in the 21st constitutional amendment.

The AGP then reiterated that he wanted to tell the court about the procedure of military trials.

However, Justice Akhtar remarked: “What is the need to explain the procedure of military trial when fundamental rights are not applicable?”

At this, the CJP asked the AGP to say what he wanted to.

Procedure of military trials

However, the CJP added, that independence of the judiciary is the basis of justice.

He said the Constitution would not be sidelined as it was in 2015.

“The right to appeal to an independent forum against the decision of a military court is a guarantee of fundamental rights,” he observed.

The AGP responded: “How the trial will be done is before the court.”

Detailing the procedure, he said: “First incident report is presented in military courts and the light of these reports, the commanding officer conducts a thorough investigation of the incident in a Court of Inquiry.”

After the investigation, civilians can be arrested under Sections 73 and 76 of the Army Act.

During the recording of the summary of evidence, the accused is given the right to cross-examine, and after that, a charge is framed under Rule 19 of the Army Act.

A panel of three officers sits to conduct a military trial, the AGP said, adding that the accused are given full right to cross-examine all the evidence and witnesses.

Justice Afridi then asked: “A commanding officer decides whether a case is made or not?”

“During a military trial, the accused are given the right to have a lawyer,” the AGP said, adding the accused can also appoint an officer of the legal branch of the army or a private lawyer.

“In military courts trial, the accused is given the option of confessing or denying the crime.

“The regular army trial of the suspect begins after someone denies the crime.”

In a military court, an officer is appointed as the presiding judge who independently reviews the proceedings.

The decision of the majority of the three trial officers in military courts is considered final, the AGP said.

He further said: “The accused can appeal against the death sentence in the Courts of Appeal.

“During the trial in military courts, the accused may consult a legal adviser.”

The CJP observed: “Accused are given very little time to defend themselves in military courts.” The AGP contradicted this.

Petitions

Following the arrests made in connection with the violent riots that erupted across the country on May 9, the government announced its decision to hold military court trials of those found guilty of damaging and attacking military instalments — a move both the government and the army considered a low blow.

In light of this decision, PTI Chairman Imran Khan, former chief justice Jawwad S Khawaja, legal expert Aitzaz Ahsan, and five civil society members, including Piler Executive Director Karamat Ali, requested the apex court to declare the military trials “unconstitutional”.

In this petition filed through his lawyer, the former CJP pleaded that Section 2(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Pakistan Army Act were inconsistent with the fundamental rights granted by the Constitution and should be struck down.

Moreover, five members of civil society from different cities — represented by Faisal Siddiqi — appealed to the apex court to declare illegal the trial of civilians in the military courts.

Similarly, Ahsan’s petition challenged the government’s decision to try civilians in military courts.

Latest News

Imran Khan’s bail request in the Toshakhana-II case has had its objections dismissed.

Published

on

By

In the Toshakhana-II case, the Islamabad High Court has dismissed the objections to PTI founder Imran Khan’s bail request.

IHC instructed the registrar’s office to schedule the hearing for the case for Monday.

Imran Khan’s attorneys, Shaheena Shahab, Ayesha Khalid, and others, arrived in court today as IHC Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb heard the case.

The registrar’s objections to the plea were questioned by Justice Aurangzeb. In the Toshakhana-II case, Imran Khan submitted a bail application, according to counsel Ayesha Khalid.

Justice Miangul said that previous rulings in circumstances comparable to this one adhered to the consistency principle. In this instance, the petitioner was a man, he added.

Bushra Bibi was given bail because she was a woman, according to the justice, and an application like this one was denied yesterday.

Given that the case action date was November and the power of attorney was executed in July, Justice Aurangzeb raised a concern about the timing.

Justice requested the help of Advocate Shah Khawar in this case.

When an applicant was held in jail, Shah Khawar retorted that it was standard procedure to obtain signatures on required documents, such as a power of attorney.

Imran Khan’s attorney, Shaheena Shahab, asked the court to send out notices regarding the bail plea. A judge named Aurangzeb said that the law would be observed.

Following arguments, the court dismissed the registrar office’s objections and ordered that the case hearing be scheduled for Monday.

Continue Reading

Latest News

PTI presents seven nominations to Imran Khan for the judicial commission.

Published

on

By

Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has proposed seven individuals to its founder, Imran Khan, for consideration as founding members of PTI for membership in the next Judicial Commission.

None of the nominated individuals are attorneys; rather, the roster includes four Members of the National Assembly (MNAs) and three senators.

The proposed MNAs are Umar Ayub, Asad Qaiser, Ali Mohammad Khan, and Aamir Dogar, while the senators are Shibli Faraz, Mohsen Aziz, and Aun Abbas Bapi. Sources suggest that the Judicial Commission will include one opposition member from both the National Assembly and the Senate.

The PTI founder will evaluate and endorse two names from the suggested list, which will then be sent to the Speaker for future actions.

Continue Reading

Latest News

Miller confirmed that Biden’s administration got a letter from a congressman requesting the release of the PTI founder.

Published

on

By

Following his removal as prime minister in 2022, Khan started a protest movement against a coalition of his enemies led by current Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. Since then, he has been in jail since August 2023 and has been involved in hundreds of cases.

In response to ARY News’ question over the congressmen’s letter during a media briefing in Washington on Monday, State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller stated, “We will respond in due course to the members.”

The United States wants to see Pakistan maintain its democracy, Miller stated.

The release of the PTI founder’s wife and sisters was a result of a meeting between the US Deputy Assistant Secretary and a Pakistani government representative in Islamabad, which was further questioned during the press briefing.

“I won’t be addressing that,” Miller said when asked if the United States was involved in their release. Miller did, however, affirm that the conference included the defense of Pakistan’s basic liberties and rights.

Sixty-two members of the US Congress urged President Joe Biden on October 24 to support the release of Imran Khan, the former prime minister of Pakistan, and other political prisoners.

The congressmen, who included well-known Muslim members Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, said in their letter that the Biden administration should ask Pakistani authorities to guarantee the safety of PTI founder Imran Khan.

They also underlined that US policy should concentrate on Pakistan’s human rights situation and asked that US ambassadors attend the PTI leader’s incarceration.

Continue Reading

Trending