The Supreme Court of Pakistan’s Constitutional Bench has remarked about the legal and constitutional complexities surrounding the trials of civilians in military courts over their alleged involvement in the May 9 attacks.
The seven-judge bench, led by Justice Aminuddin Khan, heard the appeals challenging the military trial process.
Justice Jamal Mandokhail emphasised that crimes committed during the May 9 incidents cannot be denied, but the critical issue remains the jurisdiction of the trials.
“The question is not whether a crime occurred, but where the trial should be conducted,” Justice Mandokhail remarked. The discussion centred on the 21st Amendment, which established the framework for military courts.
Justice Mandokhail pointed out that the amendment specifically prohibits political parties’ cases from being tried in military courts, raising concerns about the application of the Army Act to civilians.
Defending the government’s position, Khawaja Haris, counsel for the Defence Ministry, argued that the Army Act and its rules ensure a fair trial process.
He cited past cases, including the Supreme Court’s Liaqat Hussain verdict, to justify the use of military courts.
However, the bench sought clarification on whether this aligns with constitutional principles. Justice Musarrat Hilali highlighted the public fear and chaos during the May 9 events, including incidents of arson, looting, and attacks on government properties.
She questioned the outcome of trials for crimes such as theft and property damage that are unrelated to military installations.
Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi drew attention to the severity of the attacks, citing the torching of the Lahore Corps Commander’s residence and coordinated assaults across multiple cities.
“These were not ordinary protests but targeted attacks against state security,” he said, referencing evidence presented by the Defence Ministry, including photographs of the destruction.
