ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Army’s Lieutenant General (retired) Faiz Hamid has been formally indicted by the Field General Court Martial (FGCM) on charges of violating the Official Secrets Act and the Army Act.
The high-profile case has drawn parallels to previous military trials, including the execution of Brigadier Raja Rizwan in 2019 and the imprisonment of Lieutenant General (retired) Javed Iqbal, who was later pardoned.
On November 24, 2019, Brigadier Raja Rizwan was executed for violating the Official Secrets Act, the same charges now leveled against Faiz Hamid.
Under similar charges, Lieutenant General (retired) Javed Iqbal was sentenced to 14 years of rigorous imprisonment by the FGCM on May 30, 2019. However, the new military leadership reviewed his case, pardoned his sentence, and released him from Adiala Jail on December 29, 2023.
These outcomes reflect the possibilities that could emerge following Lt. Gen (Retd) Faiz Hamid’s formal indictment and charge-sheeting by the FGCM.
Col Inamul Rahim’s Perspective
Colonel Inamul Rahim, a retired officer of the military’s Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch and now an advocate specializing in military trial cases, told WE News that this time, the FGCM may take longer than usual to conclude the matter, as authorities have reportedly compiled stronger evidence. Additionally, General Faiz Hamid is unwell and undergoing treatment, which could also factor into the proceedings.
“Whether or not General Hamid is sentenced depends on the quality of evidence. From what I know, military authorities arrested him on August 12 and have been cautious in preparing their case, taking the necessary time to gather evidence,” said Col Inam.
Charges and Evidence Against General Hamid
Col Inamul Rahim said that the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) press release clearly outlines the charges against Gen (Retd) Faiz Hamid.
“The charges are serious and include the possession of classified records that he was not authorized to retain after retirement,” Col Inam explained. “He has violated sections of the Army Act and the Official Secrets Act.”
The ISPR statement also notes, “During the process, involvement of Lt. Gen Faiz Hamid (Retd) in events related to creating agitation and unrest, leading up to multiple incidents including but not limited to the May 9, 2023, incident for fomenting instability; at the behest of and in collusion with vested political interests, is also being separately investigated.”
Col Inam stated that a retired officer is prohibited from engaging in political activities for five years after retirement, but substantial evidence indicates that General Hamid violated this regulation. “His modus operandi has also been revealed—he allegedly purchased new SIM cards frequently to communicate with his political connections and pass on instructions,” he added.
Composition of a Military Court
A military court is convened by a Lieutenant General, with a Major General presiding over the proceedings. The FGCM panel comprises a minimum of three members, but this number can be increased. Alongside the presiding officer and another Major General, a JAG branch judge is also part of the panel, ensuring that evidence is assessed in light of applicable laws.
How a Military Court Functions
A military court operates similarl to a civilian court. According to Col Inam, after charges are framed, the accused is given time to engage legal counsel, as guaranteed under Article 10-A (Right to Fair Trial) of the Constitution.
The prosecution then presents its evidence and witnesses, who can be cross-examined by the defence counsel. Subsequently, the accused is given an opportunity to produce witnesses in their defence.
After the conclusion of the case, the FGCM questions the accused about their plea before announcing its verdict.
Differences Between Military and Civilian Courts
Advocate Imran Shafique, an expert in military trials, explained to WE News that the primary difference between military and civilian court proceedings is that military courts do not provide reasons for their decisions.
“The FGCM decision can be appealed in the Army’s appellate court,” Shafique said. “If this avenue is exhausted, the accused may approach a provincial high court under three conditions outlined by the Supreme Court in the F. B. Ali and Zaheerul Islam Abbasi cases: if the FGCM acted in a mala fide manner, was coram non judice (not legally constituted), or lacked jurisdiction.”
If a high court finds the appeal satisfactory, it could be admissible before a high court.
