The Supreme Court of Pakistan has ruled in favor of military trials of civilians involved in the May 9, 2023 riots, reversing an earlier decision that declared such trials unconstitutional. In a 5-2 majority decision, the Constitutional Bench accepted 38 intra-court appeals from the federal and provincial governments, along with groups like the Shuhada Forum Balochistan.
Restoration of Army Act Provisions and Right to Appeal
The verdict reinstates key sections of the Pakistan Army Act (PAA)—specifically Sections 2(1)(d)(i), 2(1)(d)(ii), and 59(4)—allowing civilians accused of attacking military installations or involved in offenses under the Official Secrets Act to be tried in military courts. These provisions had been struck down by a previous Supreme Court ruling in October 2023.
Justice Aminuddin Khan delivered the short order and instructed the government to amend the PAA within 45 days, granting civilians a right to appeal military court sentences in a high court. The judgment emphasized that protests become criminal when they cross into violent attacks on military facilities, arguing that such acts fall under national security rather than civilian protest.
Dissenting Views and International Concerns
Dissenting judges Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Naeem Afghan opposed the ruling, stating that trying civilians in military courts violates constitutional protections, including the right to a fair trial and the independence of the judiciary. They called for transferring all such cases back to the regular criminal courts.
The controversy stems from the military’s sentencing of 85 civilians involved in the May 9 riots, sparked by the arrest of former Prime Minister Imran Khan. These sentences ranged from two to ten years. International bodies, including the US, UK, and EU, have criticized these actions, citing violations of international legal norms.
While the court’s majority emphasized national security concerns and due process within the military framework, legal experts warn that expanding the scope of military trials of civilians could erode democratic accountability and judicial independence.
