A six-member bench, led by Justice Tariq Masood, will hold the hearing on December 13, marking a crucial development.
The bench includes Justice Aminuddin, Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, along with Justice Musarrat Hilali and Justice Irfan Saadat.
Convening a larger bench suggests the complexity and significance of issues surrounding civilian trials in military courts. It emphasizes the importance of ensuring a fair and just legal process in such cases.
As the hearing date approaches, there is anticipation about the legal arguments and deliberations before the larger bench. The outcome could have far-reaching implications for the legal landscape concerning civilian trials in military courts, making it a closely watched event.
In summary, the formation of the larger bench in the Supreme Court for the appeal against civilian trials in military courts is a crucial step. The composition of the bench and the scheduled hearing on December 13th highlight the gravity and importance of the issues, showing the judiciary’s commitment to a fair resolution.
On October 23, the Supreme Court had declared that the trial of civilians cannot be conducted in military courts. It declared Section 2(D)(1) of the Army Act unconstitutional by a majority of 4-1.
The court ruled that the 102 civilians accused of May 9 violence cannot be tried in military courts and their cases should be heard in civilian criminal courts.
A five-member bench, headed by Justice Ijazul Ahsan, had taken up the case. The bench also included Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Ayesha Malik and Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi. The court had disposed of nine petitions against the trial as withdrawn.
Later, on November 13, the Senate had passed a resolution in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling against military courts.
During a Senate session chaired by Chairman Sadiq Sanjrani, Senator Dilawar Khan presented the resolution, expressing the Upper House’s concerns regarding the Supreme Court’s ruling.
The resolution argued that the apex court’s ruling interferes with the legislative authority of parliament. It emphasized that actions against terrorists should be conducted through military courts, which have been in operation since 1967.
On November 17, the federal and Balochistan governments had challenged the decision of the Supreme Court against the establishment of the military courts.
The government had filed an intra-court appeal in the apex court through the attorney general for Pakistan, contending that the SC verdict should be annulled.
“The order of the division bench should be stayed pending the decision on the appeal,” an appeal prayed to SC.
