1 week Ago By Shahid Rao
ISLAMABAD - The defence ministry’s counsel on Monday argued before the top court that if a civilian commits an offence which falls in the ambit of Army Act, he will be tried by the Court Martial. A seven-member Constitutional Bench, headed by Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, conducted hearing of the Intra-Court Appeals (ICAs) against the apex court decision on trial of civilians by military courts. During the hearing, Khawaja Haris representing Ministry of Defence, argued that the legislature provided protection to the Army Act, saying anything inconsistent with the fundamental right can be challenged be-fore the courts.
He said that if a civilian commits an offence which falls in the ambit of Army Act then he would be tried by the Court Martial. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail noted that in F B Ali case, the two categories have been created and a forum has been provided. He said that sub-clause ‘D’ of clause 1 of Section 2 of the Act applies to every-one, who violates the Army Act, as no classification has been made.
CM takes notice of injury by kite string in Sargodha However, Khawaja Haris contended that reasonable classification has been made, saying that sub-clause ‘d’ of Section 2 does not say that all citizens would be tried by the military court, adding it would apply only to those who violate the law. Justice Mandokhail said that the offences of Official Secret Act and Pakistan Penal Code have been in-corporated in the Army Act through Defence Services Laws (Amendment) Ordinance, 1967, adding that before that Army Act was legislated only for the members of armed forces, but due to inclusion of sub-clause ‘D’ civilians, who commit such offences, could also be tried under the Act. He questioned which of the provisions except the Court Martial would not apply to a person who violates the law.
Kh Haris emphasised that the purpose of Army Act is that if a member of armed forces or a civil-ian commit an offence i.e. to breach army security or interfere in discharging of duties then he would be court martialled.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that only those offences are covered in the Act for trial before a military court, which fall under the Official Secret Act. Online registration opens for attractive vehicle number via e-Auction App Kh Haris said that under the law there is no impediment to lodge an FIR or private complaint. Justice Ma-zhar noted that for offence under Official Secret Act, it is mandatory to file an FIR.
Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi asked how a person could be arrested by army authority? Justice Mazhar noted that a person is accused after the framing of charges against him. Kh Haris stated that in Article 8(3)(a) of the constitution two issues are very important i.e.
maintenance of public order and the discharge of duties, adding if anyone commits an offence which effects the duty of armed forces member then would be tried by the military court. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that no judgment, including the impugned judgment of the Su-preme Court has touched Article 175 of the constitution pertaining to the military court, set up under Paki-stan Army Act, 1952. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail questioned whether the Court Martial is a court under Article 175? He said that Salman Akram Raja, while arguing the case, had maintained that the civilians cannot be tried by a court, which is not subordinate to the High Court, and that the armed forces which are part of the executive can’t perform judicial functions.
LHC summons AGP again over Anti-Rape Act implementation Khawaja Haris, representing Ministry of Defence, contended that the Court Martial is a special court has distinctive status. He emphasized that even the constitution has made exception regarding the military court, as these are not subordinate court in terms of Article 203 of the Constitution, and the impugned judgment has mentioned that as well, he added. He further said that the impugned judgment has declared that the Court Martial are constitutionally valid court.
He maintained that a court, which is not subordinate to the High Court would not come in the ambit of Article 175, and these courts (military) are not in the hierarchy of the judiciary. Later, the bench deferred hearing of the case till Tuesday (today). Tags: a civilian arrested army.
