Interim Sindh govt clarifies it has not challenged  SC verdict regarding military trials of civilians

The caretaker Sindh government clarified on Saturday that it did not file an appeal challenging the Supreme Court’s verdict regarding the military trails of civilians. The verdict had declared the trials of civilians under the Pakistan Army Act 1952 unconstitutional.

On October 23, the highest court declared certain sections of the Pakistan Army Act (PAA), 1952, specifically Section 2(1)(d)(i) and (ii) and Section 59(4), as unconstitutional and having no legal effect. The five-member Supreme Court bench, led by Justice Ijazul Ahsan, ruled that 103 identified individuals, along with others similarly linked to the events of May 9 and 10, should face trial in criminal courts under ordinary or special laws of the land.

Recent reports suggested that an appeal was filed by the Sindh chief secretary, challenging the viability of petitions against Army Act provisions under Article 184(3) of the Constitution. The appeal also argued that the decision to invalidate specific sections of the law contradicted previous rulings by the Supreme Court.

The Chief Minister’s House released a statement today clarifying that no appeal in the “Trial of Civilians before Military Courts” case has been filed in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The statement labeled the impression that the Sindh government filed such an appeal as baseless.

Additionally, the caretaker governments in the Centre and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa also contested the decision. The caretaker federal government specifically challenged the composition of the bench that heard the petitions.

The federal government’s appeal argued that the incidents on May 9 involved targeted attacks on military installations in an organized and coordinated manner. The attacks were not localized or isolated, indicating a premeditated attempt to undermine the country’s armed forces and internal security. The appeal emphasized the short span of time during which the attacks occurred on May 9.

It was explained that there were 62 violent incidents reported across Punjab, resulting in injuries to 250 people, including 184 law enforcement personnel. Additionally, 139 vehicles, including 98 official vehicles, suffered partial or complete damage. The overall estimated damage amounted to Rs2,539.19 million, with Rs1,982.95 million in losses to military establishments, equipment, and vehicles.

The federal government contested the composition of the bench that heard the petitions, arguing that it was not formed in accordance with the SC Practice and Procedure Act, 2023. This act was suspended by the court on April 13 but restored on Oct 11, 2023.

According to Section 2 of the Act, the bench for petitions under Article 184(3) was to be constituted by a committee comprising the Chief Justice of Pakistan and the two most senior judges of the apex court. Section 3 dictates that matters invoking jurisdiction under Article 184(3) should be first placed before the committee, which, upon examination, will form a bench for adjudication.

The appeal stated that petitioners should have first invoked the jurisdiction of the high court before directly approaching the Supreme Court. High courts could address petitions in such matters on grounds of mala fide, coram non-judice, and jurisdictional challenges, as per the caretaker government.

The caretaker government’s appeal also asserted that the Pakistan Army Act (PAA) ensures a fair trial. It highlighted that an accused person, under Rule 33 of the Army Rules, has the right to correspond with legal advisers without censorship and can interview any desired witness. Furthermore, an accused person, under Section 104 of PAA, is entitled to object to any members of a court whose names are to be read out to them.

Article 45, according to the appeal, empowers the president to grant pardon, reprieve, or respite and to remit, suspend, or commute a sentence passed by a military court.

The caretaker government emphasized that court-martials and district trial courts, both civil and sessions courts, have existed concurrently since the creation of Pakistan in 1947.