SC rejects govt plea seeking to allow military courts to announce verdicts

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court's seven-member constitutional bench on Monday rejected the government's petition requesting permission for military courts to announce case verdicts.

“Granting such permission would mean recognizing the authority of military courts,” remarked Justice Musarrat Hilali during the proceedings.

The bench, headed by Justice Amin-Ud-Din Khan, included Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, and Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan.

In a separate decision, the court also dismissed a petition by former Chief Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja seeking to postpone hearings on civilian trials in military courts until the 26th Constitutional Amendment was resolved. The court fined the former chief justice Rs20,000 for his request.

Justice Ayesha A. Malik was not part of the bench, as she had been a member of an earlier panel whose ruling was under review.

Key Points from the Hearing

During the hearing, the court asked Khawaja’s counsel if he recognized the authority of the constitutional bench. The counsel responded that he did not accept the bench's jurisdiction. Justice Mandokhail, in response, advised him to leave the courtroom.

Justice Mandokhail further questioned whether the 26th Constitutional Amendment had been invalidated. Justice Mazhar added, “You are using delaying tactics. Every hearing brings a new request.” He noted that even detainees facing military court trials hoped for a resolution.

The bench called Hafeezullah Niazi to the rostrum and asked if he wished to proceed with the case, to which Niazi affirmed. Justice Hilali, however, pointed out that he lacked the legal standing, adding, “You are delaying proceedings because none of your loved ones are in custody.”

Justice Mandokhail clarified that the court was functioning under the new constitutional amendment and that all benches were being formed in accordance with it.

Objections and Clarifications

PTI leader and lawyer Salman Akram Raja indicated his intention to challenge parts of the judgment authored by Justice Munib Akhtar.

Justice Rizvi asked how those involved in the Army Public School attack had been tried. In response, Defence Ministry counsel Khawaja Haris explained that those trials were conducted under the 21st Constitutional Amendment. Justice Mandokhail added that a constitutional amendment at the time had permitted military courts to try civilians.

The court rejected Hafeezullah Niazi’s request to transfer the accused to jail.

The additional attorney general argued that the military court trials had concluded and sought permission to announce the verdicts. However, Justice Hilali firmly stated that allowing this would implicitly confirm the military courts' jurisdiction over civilian cases, which the bench could not permit.