Roundtable talk: ‘Establishment of military courts led to a soft coup’
Lawyer fears high conviction rate may be used to justify permanent existence .
He was speaking at a roundtable discussion on the 21st Amendment and military courts in Pakistan. STOCK IMAGE
LAHORE:
“Military courts are merely a public relations stunt. Pakistan’s true problem remains a civil-military imbalance,” Waqqas Mir, former law professor at Lahore University of Management Sciences, said on Thursday.
He was speaking at a roundtable discussion on the 21st Amendment and military courts in Pakistan.
Mir said establishment of military courts through a constitutional amendment had led to a catch-22 situation for anyone who supported democracy in the country.
“If you oppose military courts, you could be seen as anti-democratic. If you support them, you could be seen as an opponent of recognising human rights,” he said.
Mir said the only way the establishment of military courts could now be challenged in a court was on grounds of the Basic Structure Doctrine.
He said there was no precedent in the history of Pakistan’s Supreme Court where it had struck down anything that involved the military or national security concerns - including military coups.
In response to Society of International Law Executive Director Ali Sultan’s proposal that one could accept establishment of military courts as a stop-gap measure, Mir said the military could justify permanent existence of these courts if it charged enough people with terrorism in two years to meet the criteria laid out in Article 264 of the Constitution.
He said the Army Act provided for normal rules of evidence in trials conducted under its jurisdiction. But, he added, there was no way to ensure that they were actually applied in trials conducted by military courts. “If a convict feels that a court has not conducted the trail in accordance with the constitution, they have the right to appeal. There is no right to appeal against military courts,” he said.
Earlier, Sultan had argued that establishment of military courts in the context of the ongoing conflict between Pakistan Army and the TTP could be justified under international law.
He said TTP met the criteria laid out in the law on war between a state and a non-state actor. However, he said, military courts in Pakistan should only be a stop-gap arrangement. He also said there was a need for clarity in the language of the 21st Amendment.
He said there was no reason why it could not be narrowed and non-state combatants be identified.
He also opposed retroactive application of the 21st amendment.
Abid Saqi, former Lahore High Court Bar Association president, said establishment of military courts violated the right of access to justice. He lamented that while earlier attempts at putting in place military courts were carried out through executive orders, this time a constitutional amendment had been used for it. “This amounts to a soft coup. The military has put itself in the driver’s seat with respect to the conflict against the TTP,” he said.
The roundtable was moderated by Rashid Rahman. He said invites had been sent to lawyers representing the military and the government but there was no response from their side.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 6th, 2015.
“Military courts are merely a public relations stunt. Pakistan’s true problem remains a civil-military imbalance,” Waqqas Mir, former law professor at Lahore University of Management Sciences, said on Thursday.
He was speaking at a roundtable discussion on the 21st Amendment and military courts in Pakistan.
Mir said establishment of military courts through a constitutional amendment had led to a catch-22 situation for anyone who supported democracy in the country.
“If you oppose military courts, you could be seen as anti-democratic. If you support them, you could be seen as an opponent of recognising human rights,” he said.
Mir said the only way the establishment of military courts could now be challenged in a court was on grounds of the Basic Structure Doctrine.
He said there was no precedent in the history of Pakistan’s Supreme Court where it had struck down anything that involved the military or national security concerns - including military coups.
In response to Society of International Law Executive Director Ali Sultan’s proposal that one could accept establishment of military courts as a stop-gap measure, Mir said the military could justify permanent existence of these courts if it charged enough people with terrorism in two years to meet the criteria laid out in Article 264 of the Constitution.
He said the Army Act provided for normal rules of evidence in trials conducted under its jurisdiction. But, he added, there was no way to ensure that they were actually applied in trials conducted by military courts. “If a convict feels that a court has not conducted the trail in accordance with the constitution, they have the right to appeal. There is no right to appeal against military courts,” he said.
Earlier, Sultan had argued that establishment of military courts in the context of the ongoing conflict between Pakistan Army and the TTP could be justified under international law.
He said TTP met the criteria laid out in the law on war between a state and a non-state actor. However, he said, military courts in Pakistan should only be a stop-gap arrangement. He also said there was a need for clarity in the language of the 21st Amendment.
He said there was no reason why it could not be narrowed and non-state combatants be identified.
He also opposed retroactive application of the 21st amendment.
Abid Saqi, former Lahore High Court Bar Association president, said establishment of military courts violated the right of access to justice. He lamented that while earlier attempts at putting in place military courts were carried out through executive orders, this time a constitutional amendment had been used for it. “This amounts to a soft coup. The military has put itself in the driver’s seat with respect to the conflict against the TTP,” he said.
The roundtable was moderated by Rashid Rahman. He said invites had been sent to lawyers representing the military and the government but there was no response from their side.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 6th, 2015.