Islamabad:
The Supreme Court has asked the Federal Government and the Parliament to approve legislation within 45 days to allow an independent right to appeal against convictions by the military courts. The Apex court emphasized that this safeguard is essential to guarantee due process and constitutional right to a fair trial.
This directive was made a decision on a set of Intra-Court (Ica) appeals heard by a larger bank of the Apex court under section 5 of the Supreme Court Law (Practice and Procedure), 2023.
Appeals challenged the judgment of October 23, 2023 in the request of the Constitution No. 24 of 2023 and related cases. In that ruling, a bank of five members (by a majority 4-1) had declared certain provisions of the Law of the Army of Pakistan, 1952 unconstitutional, and had banned the trial of civilians in the military courts after the riots from May 9 to 10, 2023.
In its last order, announced on May 7, 2025, the Supreme Court set aside that previous sentence and reinstated section 2 (1) (d) (i) and (ii) and section 59 (4) of the Army Law.
These provisions allow civilians to be tried under military law if they are accused of attracting duty military personnel or committing crimes under the law of official secrets of 1923, related to defense establishments. However, the Court clarified that this authority is limited and is not a general permit to prove civilians in all cases.
Judge Amin-Din Khan, author of the judgment of the majority of the 68 pages, declared: “Although the Army Law includes formal protections of due process, the absence of an independent law of appeal before a civil court presents constitutionally incomplete civilians. The provisions in themselves are not unconstitutional, but this gap must be addressed through legislation.”
Judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar, in a concurrent opinion, emphasized that an independent appeal right to a civil forum is a basic component of due process and the right to a right trial by virtue of article 10-A of the Constitution.
Until the Parliament approves the required amendments, the court said that the convicts of the military courts can approach the higher courts. These courts would then evaluate whether due process was followed and if the convictions were backed by appropriate evidence. The 45 -day period was established to “cure the defect” and align military justice with constitutional protections.
The court also reiterated that, although the protest and the peaceful assembly are protected rights, violence, destruction of properties and attacks on military facilities cannot be justified under the appearance of fundamental freedoms. The incidents from May 9 to 10, he said, raised serious threats to national security and required a firm but legal response.
When restoring the contested provisions of the Army Law, the Court showed deference to the Legislative Authority of Parliament, but also insisted on the necessary legal guarantees. “The law must be saved instead of destroying,” Judge Mazhar wrote. He added that while the Judicial Power interprets the law, it does not write it, it must still guarantee compliance with the Constitution.
