Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi of the Supreme Court said the intrusion of individuals into the corps commander’s house in Lahore on May 9, 2023 was undeniably a “security lapse”.
In his remarks on Tuesday, Justice Rizvi asked: “Did the people manage to reach the corps commander’s house on May 9? The entry of people into the corps commander’s house is undoubtedly a security breach.
The comments were made as the court’s constitutional bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, heard intra-judicial appeals challenging the trial of civilians in military courts following the May 9 unrest.
During the hearing, Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi remarked that the entry of people into the corps commander’s house on May 9 constituted a security lapse. He questioned whether a military officer had been tried for his involvement in the events of May 9.
Defense Ministry lawyer Khawaja Haris began presenting his arguments, saying that the individuals prosecuted in the FB Ali case were retired.
Justice Musarrat Hilali remarked: “If a soldier has a dispute with a civilian in a cantonment, where will the matter go? The Defense Department lawyer responded that the disputes were different and that the issue of military trials stretched too far.
The Defense Ministry lawyer added that even in peacetime, civilians intervening in military matters would be tried by military courts. Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi asked: “There must be a mastermind behind all this; Who orchestrated the plot?
Khawaja Haris claimed that the trial of the mastermind or conspirator would also take place in military courts and that the trial of civilians had not started suddenly, since the law had been in force since 1967.
Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi replied: “Keep in mind that the FB Ali case dates back to the era of civil martial law, with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto as the civilian martial law administrator. »
Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi raised an important question by asking the defense ministry’s lawyer: “Was there a trial for a military officer involved in the events of May 9?” How did the people manage to reach the corps commander’s house? Are you hosting a security breach? »
The Defense Ministry lawyer explained that the charges against the protesters were related to property damage and that no military officers had been charged in the May 9 incident.
Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi further asked whether there was any resistance when military installations were damaged on May 9. The defense ministry’s lawyer responded that total restraint was exercised to avoid loss of life.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel asked: “If a soldier’s rifle is stolen, where will the case be filed? The Defense Department lawyer responded that the rifle was a weapon of war for soldiers.
Judge Musarrat Hilali asked: “If a civilian steals for financial gain, even if his intention is not to disarm the army, where will the trial take place? The defense ministry’s lawyer responded that the circumstances would be taken into consideration.
Judge Mohammad Ali Mazhar pointed out that the Official Secrets Act lists crimes that fall under the jurisdiction of military courts.
Justice Musarrat Hilali noted that during the events of May 9 and 10, some protesters were unaware of what was happening. The Defense Ministry lawyer clarified that those who ignored it had not been tried by military courts.
Subsequently, the highest court adjourned the hearing of the case before the military courts until the next day.
Yesterday, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail said several offenses are listed in the Army Act, but all apply exclusively to military officers.
Justice Aminuddin urged Khawaja Haris to conclude his arguments by Tuesday. He asks for a concise explanation of which cases were transferred to military courts and why.
He added that all questions from the bench would be taken up later.
