The Constitutional Bench of Pakistan’s Supreme Court on Wednesday sought clarification from authorities on why the Army Act was not applied in cases related to the 2014 Army Public School (APS) attack.
The constitutional bench, headed by Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, heard an intra-judicial appeal challenging the decision to try civilians in military courts. Khawaja Haris appeared on behalf of the Ministry of Defense during the proceedings.
During the hearing, Judge Jamal Khan Mandokhail questioned the need to amend the Constitution to allow military trials for terrorism, pointing out the nexus between civil crimes and military courts, Express News reported.
He also asked why such trials had not been held previously, despite the existence of the Army Act.
Defense Ministry lawyer Khawaja Haris argued that the nature of the crime determines whether the trial takes place in a civilian or military court.
He stressed that if a civil crime is linked to the armed forces, it falls under the jurisdiction of military courts.
Justice Mandokhail, however, suggested that the intention of the perpetrator should be considered to determine whether the crime was against national interests.
Khawaja Haris clarified that military courts could try terrorist acts linked to religious or terrorist groups under the Army Law, with or without constitutional amendments.
Justice Mandokhail asked about the handling of important cases, such as the 2014 Army Public School (APS) attack, under the existing legal framework.
Khawaja Haris claimed that the APS attack was military-related but was not directly tried before military courts.
He noted that the constitutional amendment covered additional crimes in addition to military duties.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar added that the court focused on evaluating the constitutional status of the law, not the nature of specific crimes.
Khawaja Haris argued that if the Supreme Court upheld sections 21D and 2D2 of the Army Act, challenges before the military courts should be dismissed.
The court also referenced the 21st Constitutional Amendment, which allowed military trials for terrorism cases after the APS attack.
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan noted that the amendment had been the subject of parliamentary debate and applied judicial reasoning, while Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi highlighted the emotional context in which the amendment had been passed.
Khawaja Haris defended parliament’s role in passing the amendment, acknowledging the crucial role played by the former Senate President in its passage.
The constitutional court then adjourned the hearing until Thursday (tomorrow).
