Islamabad:
The Constitutional Bank (CB) of the Supreme Court has observed that the Martial Court should not be mixed with martial law, since the latter is completely unacceptable and an extra -constitutional measure,
A CB of seven members led by Judge Aminuddin Khan resumed Thursday to listen to the intra-court appeals filed against the October 2023 order of a Bank of the Supreme Court that declared the trial of the protesters of May 9 in the null and null military courts.
During the procedure, the Association of Lawyers of the Supreme Court (SCBA) presented its arguments written to the court. According to the presentations, the SCBA held a meeting on March 5 to deliberate on its position with respect to the military courts.
The Association declared that, in principle, civil judgments should not be carried out in the military courts. In addition, he pointed out that the provisions of the Law of the Army of Pakistan, 1952, have remained as constitutional in judicial interpretations and cannot be declared nersh at this stage.
The SCBA said that terrorism has intensified and that Pakistani citizens deserve peace and harmony. Therefore, all constitutional and legal measures must be directed to the eradication of terrorism.
On behalf of the Lahore Lawyers Association and the Bar Association of the Superior Court of Lahore, lawyer Hamid Khan argued that the Pakistan army law was introduced in May 1952 when Pakistan was governed under the law of the Government of India.
He said that the country’s first constitution was promulgated in 1956, presenting fundamental rights for the first time, and added that the Pakistan army law, 1952, was modified for the first time in 1967.
He said that the first case of conspiracy in Pakistan, the case of conspiracy of Rawalpindi, began in 1951.
Judge Hasan Azhar Rizvi said that even figures such as the poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz were involved in the case of the Rawalpindi conspiracy. Continuing with his arguments, Hamid Khan declared that to prosecute the defendant, the Special Conspiracy Judgment Law of 1951 was introduced.
The objective of conspiracy was to establish a communist system in Pakistan. The defendant included both military personnel and General Akbar Khan and civilians. However, his trial was not made in a military court but under a special court.
At this point, Judge Jamal Khan Commandkhail questioned the relevance of these historical examples to the current case of military trial, asking what connection the imposition of the martial law had with the present case. “The Constitution does not allow martial law,” he added.
