ISLAMABAD – Justice Musarrat Hilali, the second female jurist to be elevated to the country’s top court, raised concerns regarding the trial of civilians in military courts, asking whether all civilians should be treated in the same way as those involved in Army Public School APS attack.
She made the remarks during the Constitutional Bench’s review of the case related to the legality of civilian trials in military courts. The senior judge emphasized that Constitution remains intact, responding to arguments from the lawyer, who stated that fundamental rights are still protected by court decisions.
The hearing into the case further raised questions like whether military courts would try civilians who attack army personnel, with Justice Jamal Mandokhail pressing for clarity on the matter. Khawaja Haris clarified that this case was not about determining who could be tried in the future.
Justice Mandokhail said the Constitution holds supreme authority in defining crimes, but the courts established under the Constitution must handle the legal processes.
During arguments, Khawaja Haris defended their stance by referring to Brig (Rtd.) F.B. Ali (supra), which allowed military trials for civilians. He argued that the majority decision had misinterpreted key articles of the Constitution, specifically Articles 8(3) and 8(5).
Justice Mandokhail pointed out that the suspects in the May 9 riots were not part of the Armed Forces, and while the term “ex-servicemen” is commonly used, it does not apply to them. This raised further questions about the eligibility of civilians to be tried under military law.
The hearing has been adjourned, with further deliberations on the complex constitutional questions scheduled for the next session.
SC’s Justice Mandokhel questions role of executive in civilian trials in Military Courts
