SCBA opposes ‘unconstitutional’ military court trials

Slams May 9 violence, especially attacks on Lahore's Jinnah House, army installations

ISLAMABAD:

The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) representatives – belonging to the Professional Lawyers Group – on Thursday opposed the trial of suspects involved in the May 9 violence by military courts under the army act, terming it “unconstitutional”.

However, they also condemned the violence that was unleashed countrywide on May 9.

In a statement, SCBA President Abid Zuberi, Secretary Muqtedir Akhtar Shabbir, Additional Secretary Muhammad Shakeelur Rehman as well the body’s provincial office-bearers stated that they condemned the “criminal events” of May 9 in the wake of PTI chief Imran Khan’s arrest as they stood with the rule of law and supremacy of the Constitution.

Pointing out the “criminal events” that took place on May 9, the SCBA office-bearers wrote that a violent mob attacked the Jinnah House in Lahore, ransacked the place, and resorted to vandalism there.

They added that military installations across the country were attacked in a similar manner.

Read more: Alvi urges Imran to 'openly condemn' May 9 mayhem

“Such acts of violence and destruction not only undermine the rule of law but also threaten the stability and security of the country,” they continued.

The SCBA office-bearers said attacking historic and cultural landmarks, including the Jinnah House, was an assault on the shared heritage and identity of the people of Pakistan.

Similarly, they added that targeting military offices and installations posed a threat to national security.

“It is essential to protect and preserve landmarks as they serve as reminders of our nation’s history and the principles upon which it was built. [The] same goes for [the army] apparatus as [the] safety of … military installations [and] offices holds paramount importance for the nation’s security and ensuring the safety of its citizens,” they highlighted.

However, they also underlined that while it was important to address the security concerns as well as to maintain law and order, it was equally vital to uphold the principles of justice, fairness, and due process.

“As such, trials to be conducted under military courts may raise questions about transparency, impartiality, and the protection of civil liberties,” they argued.

The SCBA office-bearers wrote that it was crucial to ensure that all individuals accused of crimes were granted their fundamental rights (as enshrined in articles 4, 8, 9, 10, 10-A and 14 of the Constitution), including the opportunity of a fair trial before an already in-place criminal justice system.

“[The military courts] may also lack civilian oversight and accountability as they are composed of [army] officers, and their procedures and standards of evidence may differ from those of civilian courts. The trial[s] by military courts shall be unconstitutional,” they maintained.

The SCBA office-bearers said they were of the opinion that it was equally important to strike a balance between security imperatives and the protection of civil liberties, including the right to a fair trial.

“To address these concerns, efforts should be made to strengthen the civilian judiciary, enhance its capacity to handle terrorism-related cases, and ensure that all individuals, regardless of their alleged crimes, are afforded due process and the protection of their fundamental rights and tried in accordance with law,” the statement read.

The SCBA office-bearers called upon the government and law enforcement agencies to thoroughly, impartially, and independently investigate the criminal events of May 9, hold those ”actually” responsible for them accountable, and ensure that justice was served.

They also stated that it was essential to promote a peaceful and inclusive society, where the rule of law prevailed and where differences could be addressed through the process of dialogue and democratic methods.

The SCBA office-bearers urged the political parties to resolve their differences for the sake of national integrity and the rule of law.