Military trials of civilians: Objection raised on SC bench hearing appeals against its verdict

ISLAMABAD, (NNI): An objection was raised on the six-judge larger bench of the Supreme Court hearing a string of intra-court appeals (ICAs) against the apex court's decision nullifying the trials of civilians in military courts.

The larger bench took up the ICAs on Monday, and without wasting any time former chief justice Jawad S Khawaja's counsel Khawaja Ahmed Hussain raised the objection on the bench.

A six-member larger bench headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan conducted the hearing. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Shahid Waheed, Justice Musrat Hilali, and Justice Irfan Saadat Khan are other members of the bench.

The Supreme Court on October 23 last year had unanimously nullified the military trials of civilians allegedly involved in May 9 vandalism. The case relates to trials of 103 civilians for their alleged roles in attacks on military installations during violence after PTI founder Imran Khan's arrest.

The apex court had declared that the accused would not be tried in military courts but in criminal courts of competent jurisdiction established under the ordinary or special law of the land. On December 13, in a 5-1 majority verdict, the Supreme Court had conditionally suspended its earlier ruling.

During the proceedings on Monday, Khawaja Ahmad Hussain said he had an objection on the six-member larger bench. He said it would be appropriate to refer the matter to the Judges Committee again for the formation of the bench. He said he had made a request earlier to form a 9-member larger bench.

He said the five-member bench of the Supreme Court had earlier declared the trial null and void by giving a unanimous decision and now if the six-member bench gives its decision by four to two, then the verdict will become controversial.

He said it is important for in the judiciary that should not be controversial.

On this, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar said if a 9-member bench was formed earlier, it would not have been possible to hear the appeals today. public confidence the decision