Army ready to amend 1952 Act, SC told

Apex court grants three weeks to military authorities to make changes.

ISLAMABAD:


Following a Supreme Court observation that some clauses of the Army Act 1952 could be cancelled because they are in contravention of the Constitution, army authorities on Tuesday sought time from the apex court to amend the law.


The Army Act came under scrutiny on Monday during the hearing of a petition against one of its provisions that says no reason needs to be cited for a court martial once it has been issued. The petition was filed by Advocate Muhammad Akram, who is also a retired Pakistan Army officer, in 1999.

Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, heading a three-judge bench, granted three weeks to the army authorities to amend the law.

The counsel for military authorities, Mujeebur Rehman, told the bench that he has suggested relevant authorities to make the Army Act compatible with Pakistan Navy and Air Force Act.  He added that the army authorities have agreed to amend certain (discriminatory) clauses of the act.

At Monday’s hearing, the apex court had observed a controversial clause of the Army Act – known as “non-speaking order” — is in contravention of Article 10-A of the Constitution and can be cancelled on the basis of Article 25.


Petition against Army chief’s extension

Meanwhile, a division bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) admitted an application for early hearing against the service extension given to the chief of army staff in 2010. The court will take up the case in the third week of November.

The two-judge bench – comprising Justice Muhammad Anwar Khan Kasi and Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui – accepted the civil miscellaneous (CM) application filed by Colonel (retd) Inamur Rahim challenging the legality of the extension of Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani’s tenure.

In September, IHC Chief Justice Iqbal Hameedur Rehman had dismissed the petition terming it “not maintainable”. The petition was rejected under Article 199 (3) of the Constitution, which bars the high court from hearing military-related matters. Later, the petitioner filed an intra-court appeal (ICA) challenging the single-bench order.

The petitioner maintained that there was no provision in the Army Act 1956 and in the rules under which extension of a complete tenure could be granted to any person subject to the Army Act.

On Monday, the petitioner filed a fresh application seeking an early hearing of his appeal, especially after the recent statements given by Gen Kayani which, according to the petitioner, sparked ire at the national level — rendering it an urgent matter which should be heard on priority.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 14th, 2012.
Load Next Story