Regardless of place of trial, criminal should be punished: SC judge

ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court judge Jamal Khan Mandokhail on Tuesday emphasised that focus should be on ensuring that justice is served, regardless of the location or forum of the trial.

“Whoever commits a crime should be punished. What difference does it make where the trial takes place?”

Justice Mandokhail remarks came when the seven-member Constitutional Bench, headed by Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, was hearing the intra court appeals (ICAs) filed by the federal government and Ministry of Defence against the apex court judgement declaring trial of civilians in military courts as unconstitutional.

Other members of the bench were Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Musarrat Hilali, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan.

Faisal Siddiqui, counsel for the civil society, concluded his arguments. During the hearing the counsel, while responding to a question of Justice Mazhar, informed the bench that a total of 105 suspects were involved in the May 9 incidents, out of which 20 had been released.

However, the additional attorney general (AAG) intervened and submitted before the court that an additional 19 suspects were also released later. He further informed the court that currently 66 suspects were in jail.

Faisal Siddiqui told the court that in the United States, it is customary to allow parties to propose a draft judgement at the conclusion of arguments.

Justice Mandokhail remarked that whoever committed the crime should be punished regardless of where the trial takes place. Faisal Siddiqui, however, contended that there was a vast difference between different types of trials, adding that one type of trial is independent and transparent, whereas another takes place within the military court. He further contended that the cases related to the events of May 9 involve vandalism; however, where the defence of Pakistan is at risk, civilian suspects can be tried in military courts.

At this, Justice Mandokhail remarked that all forums exist and should be respected. The counsel for civil society referred to the F B Ali case wherein the court held that under Section 8(3)(A), laws cannot be challenged.

Meanwhile, Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) former president Abid Shahid Zubairi, representing another petitioner Bushra Qamar, while commencing his arguments, told the bench that earlier the attorney general had informed the court about legislative amendments granting the accused the right to appeal.

Justice Mandokhail then inquired whether the AG could provide such an undertaking if it was not part of the law. Zubairi informed the bench that the government had adopted the same stance in the court as well.

Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing for today (Wednesday) wherein Abid S Zubairi would continue his arguments.