Constitutional violation?: Civilian convicts challenge military laws in apex court

Court urged to recommend that the govt legislate for independent military tribunals.

ISLAMABAD:

Civilians convicted for twin suicide attacks on the motorcade of former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf have challenged provisions in military laws, which deny fundamental rights of fair trial and appeal through independent tribunals in the Supreme Court, for being in violation of the Constitution.

The petitioners, through their counsel Ikram Chaudhry, have requested for at least one opportunity of appeal against the decision of army tribunals before the apex court. They have also appealed the apex court to recommend the federal government to legislate for independent military tribunals. Chaudhry has asked that a larger bench revisit every case from FB Ali to date, including the sentences awarded to his clients, in light of the presidential reference filed in the ZA Bhutto case.

He stated that the armed forces tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to try civilians. He prayed that their cases may be re-examined on the basis of constitutional rights available to the public and on the grounds and question of law raised in the petition.

Chaudhry has contended that a clause, introduced through amending the Defence Services Law (Amendment) Ordinance 1967 in the Pakistan Army Act 1952, Air Force Act 1953 and Naval Ordinance 1961, to bring civilians within the jurisdiction of military tribunals is ultra-vires of the Constitution and is therefore liable to be struck down on the touchstone of Article 8.

He has requested that the apex court declare Section 133 of the Army Act and other provisions with amendments to the extent described in the petition ultra-vires for violating articles 2A, 4, 5, 9, 10, 10A and 25 and denial of rights under articles 175 and 203 of the Constitution and for challenging the judiciary’s independence.

Ghulam Sarwar Bhatti, Zubair Ahmed, Mushtaq Ahmad and Ikhlas Ahmed were court-martialled along with military personnel for their involvement in a December 2003 attack on Musharraf in Chaklala, Rawalpindi.

The petition states that the Pakistan Army Act, Pakistan Air Force Act and Pakistan Naval Ordinance are in conflict over sections 31(d), 37(c), and 36(3), which are discriminatory in character. The Army Act incorporates an option for appeal, while the other two acts do not.



Published in The Express Tribune, July 19^th, 2011.