ISLAMABAD (PEN) : Advocate Salman Akram Raja told the Supreme Court’s constitutional bench on Thursday that “court-martialing civilians is simply not possible under any circumstances.” He was responding to a question from Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, who had asked whether civilians could be subjected to a court-martial under Pakistan’s current legal framework.
The Supreme Court’s seven-member bench, led by Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan and including Justices Jamal Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Musarat Hilali, Naeem Akhtar Afghan, and Shahid Bilal Hassan, is hearing appeals against the trial of civilians in military courts.
Advocate Raja referenced UK law in his argument, explaining that military court cases there are not handled by military officers, but by judges appointed in a process similar to that of the high court. He emphasized that a commanding officer could only refer a case to a military court if it involved a serious matter that required an independent forum for judgment.
However, Justice Khan urged the counsel to focus on Pakistani law, not British law, which prompted a response from Advocate Raja, who clarified that his reference to British law was aimed at illustrating the importance of an independent and transparent trial process.
Justice Mazhar pointed out that British law was meant to discipline military personnel, not civilians, and questioned its relevance in this case. Advocate Raja maintained that his reference was not about the applicability of British law but about ensuring a fair and impartial trial.
Justice Hilali noted that the appeals were challenging the restoration of repealed provisions of the Army Act, and with that in mind, the court should take into account international legal standards. Had the provisions not been repealed, these arguments might not have been necessary, but given the situation, they had become critical to the case.
