‘Now you remember basic rights?’ remarks SC judge on civilians’ military trial

#remember #basic #rights #remarks #judge #civilians #military #trial

ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court Justice Musarrat Hilali on Thursday asked lawyer Salman Akram Raja to remember the basic human rights issue when the boundaries were crossed in the May 9, 2023 riots.

“The limits were crossed on May 9, and now you remember the basic rights?” Justice Hilali advised that he confessed that a crime was committed on that day.

The judge’s comments led by a seven -member constitutional bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, came out during an intra -court appeal against the hearing of military cases of civilians.

Presenting the convicted culprit Arzam Junaid, Raja argued that in the UK, court martial trials were conducted by the High Court Style judges instead of military officers, and the commanding officer only referred to serious cases to an independent forum. Can

However, Justice Aminuddin confronted that the bench belonged to Pakistan’s legal framework and warned that unnecessary talks on foreign laws would waste time.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar further pointed out that British law belongs to military discipline, while the current case includes civilians.

“How can such a law apply to citizens?” He asked the question. For this, Raja replied that the British example was presented in the context of ensuring transparent and free trials.

During the hearing, Justice Hilali said that pending appeals were wanted to restore the cancellation provisions. He emphasized that if these provisions are reviewed, international laws should also be considered.

He added that if the provisions were not canceled, the arguments could have been irrelevant, but now they are not.

Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel raised a critical question about the possibility of passing court martial from ordinary citizens under the current legal system, to which the Raja strongly replied that such a thing is not possible in any case.

The operation also highlighted the ongoing struggle for justice by the victims of the Army Public School (APS) attack, as Raja said that despite their tragic damage, the victims still with a fair and fair resolution. Lose.

Justice Aminuddin, in response, noticed that some legal barriers would be needed to navigate to get a fair trial, such as addressing Article 8 (3) of the Constitution.

In another exchange, Justice Rizvi remarked that when the army has mastered the carpus such as engineering and medical and questioned whether there should be a judicial cover within the army.

Raja further argued that simply accusing someone and depriving them of a fair case is related to the basic human rights issue.

Recalling that he was falsely accused of plotting to kill Rangers personnel with Pakistan TRAKE E-Justice (PTI) and warns that if law provisions are restored, , She may be forced to appear before the colonel-in the military case.

For this, Justice Mazhar mentioned that a section of anti -terrorism was likely to be included in the FIR against Raja, while Justice Aminuddin questioned whether military custody in his case was requested. Have gone

Raja replied that his case is an example of how the system works, where only one of the allegations can be facing a military trial.

Justice Mandokhil advised Raja to focus on facts and avoid speculation, and urged him to lay the foundation in the context of the case.

Going forward, Justice Hilali remarked that when the 21st Constitutional Amendment was implemented, you [Raja’s] The party supported the establishment of military courts.

Or, the judge said that she could say that at least one political party supported military courts under the 21st Constitutional Amendment.

Raja made it clear that he did not represent any political party and admitted that his support for military courts in the past has been a mistake.

However, Justice Hilali questioned whether it is appropriate to label past decisions as mistakes – now that the political scenario has changed.

The court also considered the clause in the 21st Amendment, in which political parties were exempted from military cases, in which Justice Mandokel gave remarks saying that it was a positive aspect.

The hearing was postponed till February 18, with Raja scheduled to continue his arguments on this date.