- The courts could not be established beyond article 175, paragraph 3, supports Raja.
- Argues that the judicial authority should be exercised during the conviction.
- The Ricevi judge compares the attack on the house of the body of the body to Syria.
Islamabad: Justice of the Supreme Court Hasan Azhar Rizvi pointed out Tuesday that vandalism had taken place inside the house of the Lahore Corps commander on May 9, 2023, noting that acts of criminal fire and destruction were now become a trend.
The remarks were made during a hearing by a constitutional bench of seven members led by judge Amin-Uud-Din Khan during an intra-core appeal against the military trials of civilians.
Representing the accused condemned Arzam Junaid, presented arguments in court, lawyer Salman Akram Raja argued that the main verdict indicated that the courts could not be established beyond article 175, paragraph 3, of the Constitution.
In response, judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar noted that in terms of service, the first hearings are carried out at the departmental level.
Raja also said that article 175 (3) should also apply to army officers. Judge Naeem Akhtar Afghan observed that the Constitution had been promulgated in 1973 and that the 18th amendment had examined the regulation of Martial law.
“Why do you want the SC to intervene in matters of the responsibility of the Parliament?” questioned.
The Afghan judge added that the question would be examined if a military officer was involved and urged the council to remain within the limits of said case.
He also mentioned that India had changed its laws through parliamentary legislation. Meanwhile, judge Rizvi stressed that images of the May 9 incidents had been broadcast on television, highlighting the damage inflicted at the house of the body commander.
He pointed out that the collapse of houses and harmful goods had become a culture, making comparisons with incidents in Bangladesh and Syria. To this, judge Jamal Khan Mandokhail said that the seizure of the home of citizens was also a crime.
Judge Rizvi then wondered if there had never been similar attacks against body commanders around the world. In response, Raja said such attacks had occurred and that he could provide examples.
Judge Mazhar asked whether the legal concerns raised during the decisions of the previous courts had been taken care of by the legislation. Judge Mandokhail pointed out that Parliament seemed to be concerned about other questions, stressing that the discussions that were held in court should rather take place in the Parliament.
Raja argued that the judicial authority should be exercised in the condemnation process, citing the previous decisions of the high court of Balutchistan which protected civilians during martial law.
He also referred to an important decision by judge Waqar Seth (late) of the High Court of Peshawar, which was even mentioned at the International Court of Justice, but was then suspended by the SC. He reiterated that no court could be established beyond article 175 (3).
