ISLAMABAD – The Supreme Court on Wednesday voted 5-1 to suspend its October 23 ruling that nullified civilian trials in military courts linked to the May 9 riots.
This decision came through intra-court appeals lodged by the federal and provincial governments, along with the defence ministry, contesting the previous verdict issued by Justice Ijazul Ahsan’s bench earlier in October.
A six-member bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and comprising Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Musarrat Hilali, and Justice Irfan Saadat Khan heard the set of intra-court appeals.
Justice Hilali differed with the majority decision.
The contentious trials were nullified on October 23, with the court ruling that the accused should be tried in criminal courts of competent jurisdiction under the nation’s ordinary or special law.
The ICAs have been filed by the caretaker federal government and the provincial governments of Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Punjab. Sindh has denied filing any related plea.
During the hearing, objections were raised about the constitution of the bench, notably by Justice Ijazul Ahsan, highlighting discrepancies in its formation. He expressed concerns about the bench composition and its adherence to established procedures.
Former Chief Justice Jawwad S Khawaja, also a petitioner challenging the military trials, objected to the inclusion of Justice Sardar Tariq Masood in the bench. He cited previous instances where both Justice Masood and Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa had recused themselves from a similar case.
The bench, headed by Justice Masood, took up 17 ICAs. The Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) urged the court to allow the conditional resumption of military trials for civilian suspects.
The hearing witnessed discussions on objections raised against the bench’s formation. Justice Masood declined to recuse himself, emphasizing that it was up to individual judges to decide on their participation.
The court accepted the AGP’s request to begin hearing arguments on the appeals. However, objections about the bench’s constitution were raised by counsels representing various parties, expressing concerns over the inclusion of Justice Masood in the proceedings.
The hearing further involved a dialogue between the bench and counsels regarding the objections raised. The AGP and counsels representing different parties presented their arguments on the appeals during the course of the hearing.
