Lady Justice wears a uniform

Trial of civilians in military courts raises questions of fairness and transparency, argues Zahid Hussain

- argues Zahid Hussain

Following a nod from Pakistan's apex court, a Field General Court Martial (FGCM) has announced its decision to sentence 25 PTI supporters to varying terms of rigorous imprisonment for their involvement in the May 9 violence last year. ISPR, the military's media wing, has described the sentences as "an important milestone in dispensation of justice".

On the other hand, the trial of civilians by a military court has been seen as controversial with many describing it as a travesty of justice. The verdict carries far-reaching implications for the country on both the internal and external fronts, and raises questions about the rule of law and the 'democratic process' in the country. In fact, the dispensation of justice outside the civilian framework can be seen as a manifestation of the rising spectre of authoritarianism in the country.

While the Supreme Court had allowed military courts to announce verdicts in the concluded trials of 85 PTI supporters on charges of attacking army installations, it had made such verdicts conditional on the Supreme Court's final decision on the legality of military courts.

It is the first time in Pakistan that civilians are facing such a form of justice under a civilian dispensation. Moreover, the decision by the newly formed constitutional bench of the top judiciary, allowing the FGCM to pronounce its ruling while a petition against military trials is still pending, has been questioned, as it has been seen as virtually endorsing such a form of justice for civilians. This can prove to be damaging for Pakistan's justice system.