How is it possible not to examine the aspect of transparent trial, Supreme Court
During the Supreme Court’s hearing on an intra-court appeal against the trial of civilians in military courts, Justice Jamal Mandukhel remarked how it was possible that Shafaq did not examine the aspect of the trial.
In the Supreme Court, a seven-member constitutional bench headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan heard the case, Defense Ministry’s lawyer Khawaja Haris gave arguments even today.
Defense Ministry lawyer Khawaja Haris said that if section 2(1) D-1 is found to be correct, what will be the result? is done
The PTI gave written demands to the government, including the release of Imran Khan
Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi remarked that the court had asked for the records of military trial cases. Should not have given.
The lawyer of the Ministry of Defense replied that he will show the record of a case to the court for review. To this, the lawyer replied that the High Courts and the Supreme Court cannot review the merits. Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi remarked that the court should not discuss the evidence presented in the trial, the court only wants to review the evidence, of natural justice. Under no one can be punished without hearing.
Lawyer Khawaja Haris said that if the sections of the law were found to be valid, the petitions would be inadmissible, Justice Jamal Mandukhel remarked that we have to see whether Article 10A was followed or not. At this point the counsel made some references, which the court said were produced on the record of the trial in the judgment referred to.
Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi, talking to the lawyer, said that two days ago you had said that the Supreme Court cannot review the record, why did you make a false statement? The lawyer replied that I had said that the evidence cannot be examined on merit.
Justice Jamal Mandukhel remarked that transparent trial is mentioned in the decision appealed against, how is it possible that the aspect of transparent trial is not reviewed. Justice Aminuddin Khan, head of the constitutional bench, inquired whether Khawaja Sahib Will you finish the arguments tomorrow? To which the lawyer replied, I will try to complete it tomorrow.
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan while giving remarks said that the Official Secrets Act was amended in August 2023, the amendment in the Official Secrets Act cannot be applied to the events of May 9.
Ali Amin Gandapur confirmed Barrister Gauhar’s meeting with the Army Chief
Khawaja Haris, the lawyer of the Ministry of Defense, said that he agreed that the application cannot be made from the past. Order not written, if there is any order, bring it on record.
The lawyer replied that the orders are part of the Supreme Court’s judgment and will highlight them tomorrow. Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan remarked that the FIRs did not contain the provisions of the Official Secrets Act, 28 accused were convicted under the Official Secrets Act. Under sections 3 and 7 of the Act, the Official Secrets Act prior to the amendment will be reviewed.
Lawyer Khawaja Haris responded by saying that provisions can be added to the FIRs later, Justice Naeem Afghan remarked that the accused were handed over to the army at the stage of investigation.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar while giving remarks said that the army should also explain the procedure for adding provisions in the FIR, later the Supreme Court adjourned the hearing till tomorrow.