Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has said that if Article 245 accepts the argument, how will the army defend its institutions? The reference to Article 245 is irrelevant in this case.

A seven -member constitutional bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, heard the intercourses against the civilian trial in military courts.

Founder PTI lawyer Azir Bhandari argued that even if the Army Act was revoked, there was a law of anti -terrorism, if there were more than one forums, it would have to be seen where the basic rights of the accused would be ensured. Article 245 of the Constitution does not give judicial powers to the army.

Islamabad High Court Bar challenges Judges Senate List in Supreme Court

Justice Jamal Mandokhel inquired whether the court is not a martial judicial proceedings. Lawyer PTI said that the court is a martial judicial authority but not just for civilians for civilians.

Justice Aminuddin said that a category of civilians also falls in the category of the Army Act, how will it be discriminated against which civilian Army Act and who is not, the reference of Article 245 is irrelevant in this case.

Justice Jamal Mandokhel said that the army has given two types of powers in the constitution, one is to defend and the other is to help the civilian government.

Not the Supreme Court under -trial, in Parliament you talk to something else here, constitutional bench

Justice Aminuddin inquired that if the army would accept the argument of Article 245, how would the army defend its institutions? If GHQ is attacked, will notification of Article 245 await?

Lawyer PTI replied that no one has to seek permission for defense if anyone is firing. Could definitely

Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan inquired that if the military and civilian violate the Official Secret Act, where would the trial be? Advocate Excuse Bhandari replied that in such a case the trial would take place in the Anti -Terrorism Court.

Justice Jamal Mandokhel said that if the purpose of creating the Army Act was understood, half the problem would be resolved. The constitution states that the law related to the Armed Forces.

Civilians’ military trial, nowadays burning and vandalism has become fashionable, Supreme Court

Advocate Azir Bhandari said that Article 8’s sub -section 3 is for the Armed Forces only. Justice Jamal Mandokhel remarked that the civilian officer was not punished in disciplinary proceedings, the military court was given the authority to be punished. If the Army officer commits a crime on leave, where will the trial be, whether the military court’s authority is very broad. Or is limited, the Rangers personnel trial in Karachi took place in the civil court.

Later, the court adjourned the hearing of the military trial case till tomorrow.