Pakistan Supreme Court Examines Legality of Military Trials for May 9 Riots

The Supreme Court of Pakistan resumed its examination of the contentious military trials of civilians involved in the May 9, 2023, riots, with a constitutional bench deliberating on their compatibility with the Constitution. Justice Naeem Akhter Afghan remarked during Friday’s proceedings that trials in military courts bear “similarities” to civilian courts, though the broader legality of such proceedings remains under scrutiny.

Context of the Case

The case centers on the military trials and subsequent sentencing of civilians implicated in attacks on military installations during riots that followed the arrest of former Prime Minister Imran Khan. On October 23, 2023, a five-judge bench unanimously declared that trying civilians in military courts violated the Constitution. The current seven-judge bench is addressing intra-court appeals challenging that ruling.

Judicial Observations

The bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan, includes Justices Afghan, Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Musarrat Hilali, and Shahid Bilal Hassan. Throughout the hearings, justices have raised concerns about the appropriateness of military courts for civilian cases.

Justice Mandokhail questioned the executive’s role in selecting military courts over anti-terrorism courts, stating, “The executive cannot play the role of the judiciary.” Justice Hilali highlighted that the May 9 cases were registered under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), not the Army Act, prompting further questions about jurisdiction.

Justice Mandokhail also expressed doubts about the competence of military officers presiding over such trials, particularly regarding severe sentences like the death penalty. “Does an army officer have sufficient expertise to hand down such harsh sentences?” he asked.

Justice Hilali echoed these concerns, questioning how verdicts could be pronounced by officers who did not directly hear the case.

Defence Ministry’s Position

Representing the Ministry of Defence, Advocate Khawaja Haris defended the trials, asserting that the Army Act is a “special law” and that military courts adhere to procedures distinct from civilian courts. He noted that suspects have the right to legal representation and that officers presiding over trials are experienced.

Haris promised to provide a detailed account of the military trial process in the next phase of his arguments. He also pointed to international examples, asserting that military courts globally operate under similar structures.

Concerns Over Sentencing

The constitutional bench previously allowed military courts to pronounce reserved verdicts for 85 civilians in custody. By December 21, 2023, 25 individuals had been sentenced to prison terms of two to ten years, with another 60 receiving similar sentences. However, the sentencing has drawn criticism domestically and internationally.

The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) condemned the trials, while the United States, United Kingdom, and European Union raised concerns, arguing that the trials contravened international laws.

The court adjourned the hearing until January 13, 2025, when the defence ministry’s counsel will continue his arguments. As deliberations progress, questions about jurisdiction, procedural fairness, and the role of military courts in trying civilians remain central to the case.

This legal battle underscores broader tensions in Pakistan’s judicial and political landscape, with implications for fundamental rights and the separation of powers. The Supreme Court’s ruling will have significant ramifications for the balance between civilian governance and military authority in thecountry.