The Supreme Court of Pakistan raised concerns about trying civilians under the Army Act, with several judges questioning its constitutional validity during a high-profile hearing.
A seven-member constitutional bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, heard final arguments from Khawaja Haris, counsel for the Ministry of Defence, on Friday in a case challenging the military trial of civilians.
The case follows the May 9 attacks on military installations, in which several civilians were charged under military laws, Express News reported.
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan said the Army Act was originally meant to apply to armed forces members only. “If civilians were to be included, it should have been explicitly mentioned,” he noted.
Justice Musarrat Hilali called the 1973 Constitution “strong and clear,” adding that the military’s legal framework appears to clash with it. “The purpose was to maintain discipline within forces. It’s not meant for civilians,” she said.
Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi questioned the process of selecting cases for military courts. “If a civilian attacks a military site, how is it related to the Army Act?” he asked.
In response, Haris argued that military courts were constitutionally endorsed, operating in both wartime and peacetime, and ensured fair trial rights.
Justice Jamal Mandokhail, meanwhile, remarked, “Let’s not risk seeking absolution for one act and inviting trouble for another.”
The court acknowledged that several legal provisions from Pakistan’s past martial law eras were rolled back through constitutional amendments, yet military court provisions remained intact.
The hearing was adjourned until April 28.
