Apex court judge highlights security breach on May 9

Counsel for ministry says military exhibited extreme restraint to avoid bloodshed

ISLAMABAD:

Justice Syed Hasan Zafar Rizvi, a member of the Constitutional Bench (CB) of the apex court, has described the trespassing of rioters into military installations after arrest of former prime minister Imran Khan on May 9, 2023 as a "security breach"

During hearing of a case related to the trial of May 9 rioters in military courts, Justice Rizvi addressed the lawyers for the Ministry of Defense, Khawaja Haris, if any military personnel was also tried by military court in connection with May 9 incidents of vandalism.

"How people on May 9 managed to reach the [Lahore] Corps Commander House. Is it not a security breach?" he asked. The judge said on that day military installations and memorials were damaged. "Did authorities offer any resistance? Resistance can be offered without opening fire," he added.

Responding to the queries, Haris said no military official faced any trial in the wake of May 9 incidents. He said during the attacks by rioters' authorities exhibited complete restraint to avoid loss of lives.

Justice Rizvi remarked that there must be a mastermind or instigator behind such events and asked who orchestrated the conspiracy. Haris stated that conspirators or masterminds would also be tried in military courts. He said trials of civilians in military courts have been happening since 1967.

On Tuesday, the seven-member CB led by Justice Aminuddin Khan and comprising Justices Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Musarrat Hilali, Naeem Akhtar Afghan, and Shahid Bilal Hassan heard the case.

During the hearing, Justice Musarrat Hilali inquired about the jurisdiction of military courts, asking what if a civilian had a dispute with a soldier in a cantonment area.

Khawaja Haris said such a disagreement would be a separate matter. He argued that even in peacetime, civilians interfering in military affairs are subject to trial in military courts.

Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail questioned where the case would be tried if a soldier's rifle was stolen. Haris responded that a rifle is a soldier's combat weapon, integral to warfare.

Justice Hilali asked whether a civilian stealing for financial gain, without the intention to disarm the army, would face trial in a military court. The lawyer said the circumstances would dictate the trial's jurisdiction.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar highlighted that the Official Secrets Act, 1923 specifies which crimes fall under the purview of military courts. Justice Hilali remarked that during the events of May 9 and May 10, some protestors were unaware of what was happening.

The hearing of the case will resume today, Wednesday.