ISLAMABAD: The federal government of Pakistan has defended the military trial of civilians accused of attacking sensitive installations, stating that it is an “apt and proportionate response” to the violent protests that erupted on May 9. The government’s argument was presented in a concise statement submitted to the Supreme Court, which is currently hearing challenges to the trial of civilians in military courts.
Attorney General of Pakistan, Mansoor Usman Awan, submitted the statement on behalf of the government, in response to petitions filed by various individuals, including former chief justice Jawwad S. Khawaja, Aitzaz Ahsan, Karamat Ali, and PTI chief Imran Khan. The Attorney General informed the court that 102 civilians, who were arrested following the May 9 violence, are currently in military custody.
In the statement, the federal government emphasized that the events of May 9 were not localized or isolated incidents, but rather a premeditated and intentional attempt to undermine the country’s armed forces and internal security. The government highlighted that the total damage amounted to Rs2,539.19 million, including losses to military establishments, equipment, and vehicles.
The government argued that while some first information reports (FIRs) filed against the suspects did not explicitly mention provisions of the Army Act, the Supreme Court had previously established that the nature of offenses is determined by the contents of the FIRs, not the specific statutory provision mentioned. Therefore, the absence of mention of the Army Act in some FIRs does not preclude offenses under that Act from being applicable.
Supreme Court’s Jurisdiction
Additionally, the government contended that the petitions challenging the military trial of civilians should be heard by high courts in their original constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199, rather than the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution. The government asserted that the Army Act and the Official Secrets Act, under which the trials are being conducted, are longstanding laws that have never been challenged and are in accordance with the law.
Regarding the trials themselves, the government highlighted that only those accused who strictly fall within the offenses stipulated in the Official Secrets Act are being prosecuted under the Army Act. The government emphasized that the trials under army laws are conducted following a similar process to ordinary civil and session courts, adhering to the established practices of judicial proceedings.
The government further argued that the violence against military and defense installations constituted a direct attack on national security. Citing recent incidents involving Shakeel Afridi and Kulbhushan Yadav, the government asserted that foreign powers are constantly working to destabilize the armed forces and weaken national security. In light of these assertions, the government called on the Supreme Court to dismiss the pleas challenging the military trial of civilians.
The Supreme Court will resume the hearing on July 18 and may consider reconstituting the bench or referring the petitions to the full court, as suggested by one of the bench members, Justice Yahya Afridi.
