Supreme Court Questions Justification for Military Trials of Civilians

Islamabad – During the hearing on the trial of civilians in military courts, the Supreme Court raised critical questions about the scope and fairness of military trials under the Army Act. Justice Jamal Mandokhail remarked that if entering restricted areas leads to military trials, then it would become very easy to subject anyone to such proceedings. He also questioned why cases are not being tried in regular courts and whether military courts are chosen simply because they hand down harsher sentences.
A seven-member constitutional bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, resumed the hearing on the legality of trying civilians in military courts. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar noted that the Defence of Pakistan and Defence Services of Pakistan are two separate concepts.
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan expressed concern over civilians being at risk, citing that shopping malls have been constructed in cantonment areas. He asked, “If I enter a cantonment without a permit, would I also face a military trial?” He emphasized that this was the first such case since the 1967 amendment regarding military trials.
Justice Afghan also highlighted the prevalence of cantonment areas in major cities like Lahore, Quetta, and Gujranwala, raising concerns that civilians could be vulnerable under the current interpretation of the law.
Justice Jamal Mandokhail added that Quetta Cantonment frequently sees such confrontations and questioned why an independent forum doesn’t exist for military trials, especially since Article 10-A of the Constitution ensures the right to a fair trial. He affirmed that while the Army Act is a legitimate law, its application must align with constitutional rights.
Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi mentioned that several Supreme Court judges reside in Clifton Cantonment, Karachi, where no restricted area has been officially notified. Similarly, Justice Mazhar noted that shopping malls are not typically classified as restricted zones.
The bench observed that under the Official Secrets Act, already in place since Pakistan’s inception, constitutional protections must be considered in all legal proceedings. The hearing has been adjourned until April 15.