Nine-judge bench to take up pleas against military courts

[ghazi52]

,..,.,.,

Nine-judge bench to take up pleas against military courts ​

Nasir Iqbal
June 22, 2023

• Three senior-most judges of apex court to sit on same bench
• PM’s aide Irfan Qadir says ex-CJP shouldn’t have approached top court as a litigant

ISLAMABAD: A nine-judge Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial will take up on Thursday (today) a set of four petitions challenging the trial of civilians in military courts.

The larger bench will include Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yayha Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, and Justice Ayesha Malik.

These petitions were filed by former CJP Jawwad S. Khawaja, Aitzaz Ahsan, Karamat Ali, and PTI Chairman Imran Khan. Mr Khawaja, who filed the petition through his counsel Advocate Khawaja Ahmad Hosain on Tuesday, requested the Supreme Court to declare the trial of civilians by the military courts unconstitutional.

The former CJP pleaded that Section 2(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Pakistan Army Act were inconsistent with the fundamental rights conferred by the Constitution and therefore void and should be struck down.

As an interim measure, all proceedings against civilians based on the sections should be suspended or, in the alternative, any military court should be restrained from passing a final order in any case against civilians based on the sections, the petition had stated.

Before this petition, five members of the civil society from different cities through their counsel Faisal Siddiqi sought as illegal the trial of civilians in the military courts in connection with May 9 violence.

Likewise, Aitzaz Ahsan, who has also served as a former law minister and also spearheaded the 2007 lawyers movement, explained that the primary purpose of his petition was to ensure that none of the thousands of civilians who have admittedly been arrested for allegedly having partaken in the May 9 violence and being nominated for trial before the military courts be tried by the military courts.

The petitioner said he did not seek to scuttle any trial of any civilian before any lawfully established court of criminal jurisdiction.

In his petition, PTI Chairman Imran Khan sought a declaration against the arrests, investigation, and trial of civilians in peacetime under the Pakistan Army Act (PAA) 1952 as well as the Official Secrets Act 1923.

‘Doesn’t behove ex-CJ’

Separately, Prime Minister’s Special Adviser on Accountability Irfan Qadir took strong exception to ex-CJ Khawaja’s challenge to the trial of civilians in the military courts, regretting it was unprecedented that a former chief justice coming to the top court as a litigant where he already served as the top judge.

“Never in the judicial history of Pakistan, any CJP made himself a party especially in a case when there seemed to be a divide in the Supreme Court and when the military installations had been attacked with impunity,” Mr Qadir said while talking to the media at his office on the premises of the Prime Minister Secretariat on the Constitution Avenue.

To substantiate his point of view, Mr Qadir cited the example of Article VI of the Code of Conduct for the superior court judges which clearly states: “A judge should endeavour to avoid, as far as possible, being involved, either on his own behalf or on behalf of others, in litigation or in matters which are liable to lead to litigation such as industry, trade or speculative transactions.”

Article VI also stated that the judge will not employ the influence of his position to gain undue advantage, whether immediate or future, which is a grave fault, he said.

When reminded that Mr Khawaja had approached the apex court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution for a public interest issue, he retorted that civilians had been tried under PAA since the law had existed for the last 70 years. He questioned why the vires of the law had been challenged after a lapse of so many years.

“It does not behove of a top judge to become a litigant before the apex court in such a manner,” Mr Qadir regretted. He said it would be “wrong to suggest that judges junior to him or who were elevated on his recommendation would not be influenced with his presence as a litigant in the court”.

Nine-judge bench to take up pleas against military courts today

PM’s aide Irfan Qadir says ex-CJP shouldn’t have approached top court as a litigant.

www.dawn.com

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,.,
In a significant development, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial on Wednesday formed a nine-member larger bench to hear petitions filed by former CJP Jawad S Khawaja and others against the trial of alleged May 9 rioters in military courts.

Led by the CJP himself, the larger bench includes two senior most SC judges—Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Sardar Tariq Masood. Interestingly, CJP Bandial has included these two judges for the first time in any bench hearing a politically sensitive matter.

According to the supplementary cause list issued by the SC’s assistant registrar on Wednesday, the bench also includes Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Ayesha A Maik.

 

[Jango]

I will say, QFI is unfortunately a small and petty man in a big position.

 

[Path-Finder]

I will say, QFI is unfortunately a small and petty man in a big position.

issa is a bitch of junta and amritsari's.

 

[Jango]

issa is a bitch of junta and amritsari's.

I can't wait for the day when he gets backstabbed by those very people who are sucking him off right now.

When he moves off from the given line, his property case will come out again.

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,.,

If he cannot hear the case because of the Practice and Procedure Bill, then he should not be paid.

 

[Path-Finder]

I can't wait for the day when he gets backstabbed by those very people who are sucking him off right now.

When he moves off from the given line, his property case will come out again.

his properties in London which he cannot account for is going to be the controller in the hands of the players. qazi knows he is not in control of his actions but will play along to the demands of the players.

corruption is so rampant in Pakistan that new revelations just keep breaking old records.

 

[ghazi52]

,.,.

Military trials of civilians: AGP told to seek directives from govt regarding right of appeal in military courts​

AGP Awan says attacks on military installations took place at “approximately the same time” on May 9.

The directive came as a six-member Supreme Court (SC) bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial and consisting Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Ayesha A. Malik, heard a set of pleas challenging the military trials of civilians.

 

[ghazi52]

,..,,.

CJP opposes applying tough military laws to civilians​

Nasir Iqbal
July 19, 2023

• Justice Bandial says verdicts of army courts ‘not subject to judicial review’
• Explains why constituting full court may not be possible at the moment
• Expresses satisfaction over treatment of suspects facing military trials


ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial on Tuesday observed that civilians should not be put through the rigours and harshness of military courts, since they enjoy certain constitutional protections, and besides, such trials were not according to the Constitution.

“The military law is a tough law and meant to be different from the ordinary law that may be good for military personnel only,” the CJP observed while heading a six-judge bench hearing petitions assailing the trial of civilians in military courts.

One of the concerns about such trials, the CJP observed, was that the verdicts of a military court were not open to the public, nor subject to judicial review.

The observation came when Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan cited a June 23 note by Justice Yahya Afridi, in which the judge had urged the CJP to consider reconstituting a full court consisting of all available judges to hear the matter.

Ironically, Justice Afridi’s note was not available in the order sheet and the court staff had to take a few minutes to locate the same. Justice Ayesha A. Malik, one of the members of the bench, also pointed out that the order sheet did not contain the note and that the AGP had also not attached it with the federal government’s concise statement.

Pointing at the AGP, Justice Bandial observed that the law officer “has left us with a thought which needed to be considered”, but in the same breath, he explained the practical difficulties in the constitution of the larger bench.

The CJP said three judges had already recused themselves from the bench, while some judges were away. “At this stage, it seems the constitution of the full court is not possible, besides it will also delay the hearing since we have to start it all over again,” he observed before postponing the hearing for Wednesday.

Justice Bandial stressed that each member of the court “enjoys his highest respect and regard and he always treats their comments with a desire to comply with their opinions”.

He added that he had read the Justice Afridi’s note saying one must notice the grace shown by the judge when he emphasised the need for forging the trust and credibility of the court.

Justice Bandial also expressed surprise over the objection made by the government on June 26, seeking the recusal of Justice Mansoor Ali Shah. “Why should this happen,” he wondered, recalling the law was very clear wherein it had been held that in the public interest litigations, interests of judges are not involved and therefore judges did not need to withdraw. He added the judge showed grace by disassociating from the bench.

Treatment of those in military custody

Justice Bandial, however, expressed his satisfaction that the individuals under the custody of the authorities have been allowed to meet their family members and that the authorities were extending a certain degree of respect to civilians.

He also referred to the arguments of Sardar Latif Khosa and Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, who had requested that the cases of the accused of May 9 violence be heard by the anti-terrorism courts (ATC), rather than the military courts.

Soon after the hearing, former additional attorney general Tariq Khokhar commented that the military courts’ case “could yet be this CJP’s finest hour”.

Earlier, the AGP argued that the vires of Section 2(1)(d)(i) and Section 54 of the Pakistan Military Act (PAA) have been challenged under Article 184(3) of the Constitution for the first time, therefore the court should consider forming a larger bench.

At this Justice, Ayesha A. Malik asked the AGP to read the order of June 26 when the remaining judges of the bench had asked the CJP to reconstitute the bench.

“Don’t make half-baked objections,” Justice Malik observed while pointing towards the AGP.

“Are you suggesting that we need more than 17 judges to hear the matter which is not possible and now you say that we should reconstitute the bench with all the available judges when some judges have recused,” she said.

Justice Munib Akhtar also observed that the bench was constituted on June 26 after the judges realised unanimously that the present case was a part-heard matter.

During the hearing, Irfan Qadir on behalf of the defence ministry repeatedly tried to take the rostrum, but the AGP requested him to take his seat; rather at one point he even changed the direction of the microphone away from the counsel.

 

[ghazi52]

,..,.,

 

[ghazi52]

,,,,.,.

Military trials of civilians should not begin without informing SC: CJP​

 

[Riz]

,,,,.,.

Military trials of civilians should not begin without informing SC: CJP​

How shameful that we have Chief Justice like this harami bandyal , he is nothing but a puppet of establishment who was part of the famous regime change operation

 

[ghazi52]

At the moment, Pakistan is being ruled by Army, everybody in this world knows, no nobody in between.

 

[ghazi52]

,.,.,.

Military trials of civilians: SC reserves verdict on fresh plea for full court​

Haseeb Bhatti
August 1, 2023

A six-member bench of the Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday reserved its verdict on a fresh petition seeking the formation of a full court to hear pleas challenging the military trials of civilians.

The bench comprised Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Ayesha A. Malik.

Earlier, the apex court had rejected the federal government’s plea to constitute a full court for the case.

However, a fresh application pertaining to the matter was moved yesterday by senior counsel Faisal Siddiqi on behalf of civil society members. “The full court should include all judges willing and available for the adjudication on the fundamental and complex constitutional and legal questions,” it said.

The petition further stated that the petitioners would have no objection if all the judges of the SC were part of the proposed full court.

“It is categorically stated that unlike the government’s malafide actions, the petitioners have no objection, whatsoever, on any judge willing and available to hear this case,” it added.

During today’s hearing, the CJP discussed the plea with the other petitioners in the case, following which the apex court reserved its verdict on Siddiqi’s application. Justice Bandial said the bench would announce its decision after holding a discussion. He added that lawyers would be informed in case of a delay in the verdict.

However, a court associate later told reporters gathered outside the SC building that the reserved verdict would be announced tomorrow (Wednesday).

The hearing​

At the outset of the hearing, the CJP noted that senior counsel Faisal Siddiqi had petitioned the court a day earlier to form a full court to hear pleas against the military trials of civilians.

Justice Bandial then said that the bench would first hear the arguments of the lawyer representing ex-CJP Jawwad S. Khawaja, one of the original petitioners in the case.

“My client is the former chief justice of Pakistan,” Advocate Khwaja Hussain Ahmed said. “My client wants the court to treat him like a common citizen, not a special person. He wants ‘ex-chief justice’ to be removed from his name.”

Here, Justice Bandial said that the former chief justice was a prominent personality and his petition was “apolitical”.

At one point, the apex court judge also asked if Siddiqi was “hiding”, to which he was told that the counsel was outside the courtroom for some work and would return soon.

As the hearing continued, Justice Naqvi said the law did not give permission to “pick and choose”, asking why the inquiry against civilians was not brought on record.

For his part, the AGP replied that a lot of caution was exercised during the arrests. “Only people directly involved were sent to military courts. Those who entered the Lahore Corps Commander’s residence have been sent to military courts,” he said.

However, Justice Bandial remarked that Awan’s claim could be proven if there was evidence available.

The AGP highlighted that the court had questions regarding why the remaining suspects, arrested for the violent events of May 9, were let go. “A lot of people were involved but arrests were made in the light of the evidence,” Awan said.

Here, Justice Naqvi again asked why an inquiry, if conducted, was not brought on record. In his reply, Awan insisted that the inquiry was present.

Subsequently, the CJP said, “You are saying that only people who attacked army installations were taken into custody.”

People who damaged the Lahore Corps Commander House, the AGP pointed out, were also arrested.

“This means that the government will conduct court martial of the 102 people arrested,” the top judge remarked.

Meanwhile, Awan said a report on 102 suspects facing military trials had been submitted to the top court. He also provided a breakdown of the arrests made following the May 9 violence.

According to the details, seven people were in custody for breaking into the General Headquarters in Rawalpindi, four for attacking the army institute, 28 for attacking the Lahore corps commander’s residence, 15 for their involvement in attacks on army garrisons in Multan and Gujranwala, eight for attacking an ISI office in Faisalabad and five for their involvement in the attack on the PAF Air Base in Mianwali.

Fourteen suspects, the AGP continued, were involved in the attack on Chakdara gateway while seven attacked the Punjab Regiment Centre in Mardan. Moreover, 13 suspects were taken into custody for attacks on army garrisons in Abbottabad and Bannu.

“All these people were arrested on the basis of CCTV footage and other evidence,” he added.

On the other hand, Justice Ayesha noted that the reasons for sending the suspects to military courts were not mentioned in the magistrate’s order. Justice Naqvi also said that apparently only photographs had been collected in the “name of evidence”.

“It looks like you aren’t fully prepared to answer these questions,” the CJP stated, addressing the AGP. “We have to look at the constitutionality of the matter,” he added.

Justice Bandial then mentioned the plea filed by Siddiqi pertaining to the formation of a full court and said the bench would first hear arguments on this petition.

Subsequently, Siddiqi came to the rostrum. He said his plea “doesn’t have anything to do” with the government plea seeking the formation of a full court. “I will first elaborate on why our petition is different,” he said.

The lawyer explained that there were three reasons behind the filing of the application. “Even military dictator Gen Pervaiz Musharraf couldn’t oppose a full court decision,” he stated, recalling that Justices Mansoor Ali Shah and Yahya Afridi had also talked about constituting a full court.

“The AGP has already said that no suspect would be sentenced to life imprisonment or death,” Siddiqi said. “The attorney general has also assured that military trials would not commence without the SC’s knowledge.”

However, he claimed, the government had in recent days raised questions on the legality of court verdicts and stressed the importance of forming a full court for a case as important as military trials of civilians. “When there is fear of conflict between institutions, a full court should be constituted,” he said.

The CJP stated that some judges had refused to be a part of the bench and asked how a full court could be formed in such circumstances.

Meanwhile, Justice Naqvi asked if other petitioners in the case had a similar point of view after which former minister Aitzaz Ahsan came to the rostrum.

“This is very startling for me that the formation of the bench is being challenged at this stage of the case,” he said. “We have gone to jail for the honour of the apex court,” Ahsan said.

Ahsan asserted that he had “complete confidence” in the current bench, recalling that the court had included all available judges on the bench. “After the departure of two judges, this is a full court of sorts,” he said.

The lawyer then demanded that the 102 people in military custody be handed over to judicial custody.

After hearing the arguments, the court reserved its verdict on Siddiqi’s petition regarding the constitution of a full court bench.

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,

SC rejects plea seeking full court on military trials of civilians​

Haseeb Bhatti
August 2, 2023

The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday rejected a plea seeking the formation of a full court to hear petitions challenging the military trials of civilians.

The reserved verdict was announced by a six-member bench comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Ayesha A. Malik.

A day earlier, the six-judge bench had tried to hear out the counsel representing different petitioners on how to deal with a fresh application moved by senior counsel Faisal Siddiqi requesting the formation of a full court, consisting of all the available judges, to hear the matter.

Almost all counsels representing different petitioners opposed the idea, though Advocate Khwaja Ahmad Hosain, on behalf of former CJP Jawwad S. Khawaja, sought time to seek fresh instructions from his client.

The full court request was, however, described by Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan — one of the petitioners — as an attempt to deprive the court of its “finest moment” in the country’s judicial history to be performed at the hands of Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial.

He suggested the court order transfer of the accused persons to judicial custody so that no physical harm is done to the detained persons since the “state does not have sufficient material to have physical custody” of the accused.

But before retiring for the day, the CJP observed that the decision regarding the constitution of a full court would either be announced in 15 minutes or litigants will be informed about the final outcome on Wednesday (today).

During the hearing today, Justice Bandial called Faisal Siddiqi to the rostrum and said, “We discussed the formation of full court among ourselves.”

Addressing the senior counsel, the top judge said Siddiqi was a respectable lawyer but requested him to not file petitions like the one seeking the formation of a full court.

“We have seen that a full court was formed in the past but it could not sustain in such circumstances,” the CJP pointed out. He further said that a full court was unavailable till September.

The top judge recalled that larger benches were formed twice in the case at the hand but were unable to complete proceedings in the case. “It is impossible to hear the case by forming a larger bench,” he said.

Justice Bandial also said that the court did not care about criticism and “leaves what is right and wrong to history”.

“We will continue our work whether someone likes it or not,” the CJP remarked and directed the counsels to resume their arguments.

Today’s hearing
At the outset of the proceedings, Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan told the court that the 102 suspects in military custody were allowed to meet their families and assurances had been given.

He went on to say that matters pertaining to a counsel of choice and detailed decisions were also discussed. “We have also ensured that none of the suspects would be sentenced to death or life imprisonment.”

“The dignity and respect of all 102 persons are guaranteed,” Awan promised, adding that none of the suspects were mistreated.

Yesterday, the AGP continued, lawyer Latif Khossa had complained of the ill-treatment of suspects. “I checked myself, none of them were treated badly,” he assured the court, adding that the suspects were given proper medical facilities.

Action would be taken if any of the suspects are mistreated, he added.

At one point, Justice Ayesha asked, “How will you differentiate between the scope of the judiciary and legislature when it comes to military courts?”

The AGP replied that the scope of court martial had been separated and read out the SC’s verdict in a similar case.

At this, the CJP asked Awan if he was saying that military courts were not in accordance with the law.

“These courts were constituted under the law but were an exception to Article 175 of the Constitution,” the AGP said, explaining that court martial didn’t fall under the said law.

“If true, doesn’t this make arguments of petitioners correct?” Justice Akhtar asked here. “The petitioners are saying the same that civilians have fundamental rights and this can only be seen by courts established under Article 175.”

Meanwhile, Justice Afridi asked which court would the 102 suspects in military custody tried in. “Martial law courts or military courts?”

“Their trial will be held in military courts,” the AGP replied.