Supreme Court Judge Musarrat Hilali has asked if Article 8 (2) of the Constitution. 3, also applies to civilians, and notes that the said article is included in the Constitution only to discipline members of the armed forces.

“The Constitution includes this provision just to secure discipline among the members of the armed forces. When it is clear that it relates only to members [of armed forces] So what is left [for imagination]? “Noticed the judge on Friday.

Justice Hilali was part of a seven-member constitutional bench (CB) of the Supreme Court, which hears Intra Court of Justice filed against a former SC order describing trial against 9 May rebels of military courts under the Pakistan Army Act, 1952.

Article 8 (2). 3 of the Constitution deals with exceptions to the general rule that laws that are incompatible with or in the exception of fundamental rights are invalid.

It specifically exempts laws in connection with the armed forces, police and other disciplinary forces from the protection of articles 8 (2). 1 and (2), as long as these laws relate to the performance of their duties or maintenance of discipline within their ranks.

Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan also agreed to Justice Hilali and stated that Article 8 (2). 3, only applies to the members of armed forces. “If the civilian used would be mentioned clearly [in the said article]”He said.

According to justice Afghans during the martial arts laws during martial arts were included in the Constitution. Later, the political government changed the constitution to revive it in its original form. However, the governments did not affect the Pakistan Army Act, 1952.

During the hearing on Friday, the lawyer for the Ministry of Defense, Khawaja Haris, ended his arguments for the bench led by Justice Aminuddin Khan.

In his reply, Haris said there was no provision in the past to file an appeal against the order of a military court. However, people facing military lawsuits were later given the right to appeal when the question reached the federal Shariat court. The court gave up that a right to appeal was prescribed under Sharia.

Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi asked Haris how 105 people were “elected and elected” for military trial among thousands of people accused of resorting to violence following the arrest of former Prime Minister Imran Khan on May 9, 2023.

Khawaja Haris said it was not a matter of choosing and choosing and that cases were referred to anti-terrorism courts (ATCs) or military courts based on their nature.

When the lawyer claimed that Court Martial was approved by the Constitution, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail warned him that the result of the case might be even greater than a simple description of the military trial on May 9 accused. He said under Article 2 of the Constitution that there are only two types of courts: subordinate courts and superior courts.

Justice Hilali noted that section 2 (2). 1 (d) (1), was added to the Pakistan Army Act, 1952 later in 1967. She said that the Pakistan Army Act, 1952, contradicts the Constitution, which according to her is very healing. “

Section 2 (2). Paragraph 1 (d) (1) of the Pakistan Army Act, 1952 defines individuals who are subject to the law, including those who are not otherwise subject to it but accused of certain offenses in relation to defense institutions or the armed forces.

Specifically, the persons charged with offenses in accordance with the law of official secrets, 1923, related to defense, fleet, military or air force.

Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi said 12 to 13 military installations were attacked on May 9, 2023 and that these attacks were a mistake in safety.

“At that time, action was taken against military officers. Has any institution held any military officer responsible for May 9?” He asked.

The extra law lawyer replied that General Attorney for Pakistan Mansoor Awan will answer that question during the next hearing. The court later exposed until April 28.