Islamabad ‘:
The constitutional bench (CB) of the Supreme Court noted on Wednesday how an institution could hear an affair when the institution itself was the complainant, while the judges raised the question of whether the federation and the provinces trusted their own institutions.
A constitutional bench of seven members, led by Judge Aminuddin Khan, heard intra-couts against the decision of the Supreme Court which declared the military trial of civilians as no and not avenue. During the hearing, the court heard the Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP).
The bench also included judge Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Judge Mussarat Hilali, judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar, judge Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Judge Naeem Akhtar Afghan and judge Shahid Bilal. AGP Mansoor Awan appeared in court.
The AGP said that there was a complete procedure for the martial trial of the Court, adding that the entire file was with the court on the way a military trial was conducted. He explained that if someone was sentenced to death, the decision would not be implemented before the appeal against this.
Judge Mandokhel said the appeal was a fundamental right, adding that fundamental rights were available in the Constitution. He then asked the AGP whether or not there was the right to appeal now.
Judge Mazhar asked the AGP if the court had given someone the right to a fair trial, what was the problem. Judge Mandokhail pointed out that when the institution itself was the complainant, how she could hear the case.
The AGP replied that when Khawaja Haris ends his arguments in the case, he would try to finish his arguments as soon as possible. Later, the court postponed more hearing the case until Thursday (today).
