CB returns military court trial record

The Supreme Court's constitutional bench on Wednesday returned the record of military court trials to the defence counsel, citing concerns that reviewing it during the appeal hearing could impact the case against military courts trying civilians. During the proceedings, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail raised questions regarding the credentials of judges presiding over military trials. He also asked whether Article 175 of the Constitution allowed room for the establishment of military courts. The bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan, included Justices Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Ayesha Malik, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hasan Azhar Naqvi, Musarrat Hilali, Naeem Afghan and Shahid Bilal Hasan. The court was hearing an intra-court appeal against the earlier verdict that barred military courts from trying civilians. Representing the defence ministry, lawyer Khwaja Haris argued that if the court scrutinised the issue under Article 175, all previous decisions regarding the establishment of military courts would need to be re-evaluated. He pointed out that the Constitution allowed for the creation of courts, and several other countries also have military courts. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail remarked that the army handles anti-narcotics matters and, when conducting a trial against an accused, it consults a sessions judge from the high court. He questioned whether military courts could follow a similar practice. Haris argued that military courts had been kept separate from Article 175 in all legal decisions, adding that the Army Act could not be challenged on the basis of fundamental rights. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail expressed concern over a growing trend of public scepticism toward court judgments, stating that laypersons were increasingly casting doubt on verdicts issued by even eight-member benches. Justice Musarrat Hilali lamented that social media narratives and impressions that suggested judges had political affiliations. "I belong to Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and question military trials because of their impact on the people of my province. But, unfortunately, social media links me to a political party," she remarked. Justice Hasan Azhar Naqvi questioned whether journalists and relatives of the accused were allowed to attend military court proceedings. In response, Khwaja Haris explained that while the law permits access, security concerns often prevent journalists and relatives from attending trials. During the hearing, the defence counsel submitted the military trial records to the bench, distributing copies among the judges. However, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail asserted that reviewing the records at this stage was inappropriate, as it could impact the appeal's outcome. Subsequently, six judges on the bench returned the records to the defence counsel. Justice Mandokhail further noted that judges conducting military trials were subordinate to the authorities, raising concerns about their independence. However, Khwaja Haris responded that any claims of bias should be supported by evidence. Justice Mandokhail clarified that he had no personal doubts or objections but emphasized the need to examine the qualifications and impartiality of those conducting military trials. As the hearing concluded, Justice Aminuddin Khan directed the defence counsel to complete arguments by Thursday. In response, Khwaja Haris assured the court that he would conclude his submissions within the given timeframe.

if you want to get more information about this news then click on below link

More Detail