ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed Attorney General Salman Aslam Butt to submit details pertaining to the trials of five convicts awarded death sentences by military courts in order to see whether the principle of fair trial was followed or not.
During the hearing, Hamid Khan — counsel for Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) — contended before the court that the 21st amendment is reactionary in nature.
The bench took exception when Khan pointed out that Pakistan is signatory to international treaties to uphold fundamental rights.
‘We cannot allow international treaties to dictate our local laws,” said another member of the bench Justice Asif Saeed Khosa.
Justice Khosa also said that the ‘executive’ has attempted to shift the blame for inaction against terrorism on the judiciary in the form of the 21st amendment.
Meanwhile, Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk questioned whether the 21st amendment has successfully given protection to military courts.
Abid Zuberi, the counsel for Sindh High Court Bar Association, will present his arguments against the 21st amendment in the next hearing of the case which was adjourned until tomorrow.
Military courts were agreed upon by the political leadership under the National Action Plan (NAP) against terrorism adopted in December after the Peshawar school tragedy in which 150 students and staff lost their lives.
The Parliament later amended the Constitution and the Army Act to pave the way for the establishment of military courts for a period of two years.
The army has set up nine courts — three each in KP and Punjab, two in Sindh and one in Balochistan.
Sep 25, 2016 0
Sep 25, 2016 0
Sep 24, 2016 0
Special coverage on China's Two Party Sessions by The Daily Mail - People's Daily