ISLAMABAD – The Supreme Court (SC) Justice Hassan Rizvi remarked that the court wanted to examine how the evidence was assessed during the trials of the civilians in the military courts.
A SC seven-member constitutional bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, conducted the hearing.
Advocate Khawaja Haris while representing the Ministry of Defence continued his arguments, stating that if Section 2(1)(d)(1) is upheld, what would be the resulting implications?
He argued that if the legal provisions are found valid, the petitions against the trials would be inadmissible.
He further emphasized that the complete procedure is followed in military trials.
Justice Hassan Rizvi noted that the court had requested records of the cases tried in military courts.
He reiterated that the court seeks to understand how decisions were made based on the presented evidence.
On Wednesday, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail had raised critical questions regarding the necessity of amending the Constitution to conduct trials of terrorists in military courts.
Justice Mandokhail inquired why military trials did not occur despite the presence of the Army Act and coordination mechanisms.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail remarked that the court could examine intent and questioned the purpose behind the crime, asking whether it was against national interests.
