The future of the PTI activists detained on May 9 remains unknown
Legal professionals argue that the postponement of military court proceedings is unjustifiable.
ISLAMABAD:
The destiny of several PTI activists detained in military custody still hangs in the balance, even after more than ten months have elapsed since their arrest. The Supreme Court has not yet made a verdict on their case regarding the purported assault on military installations on May 9.
The court's failure to reach a decision has led to speculation, with internal conflicts within the apex court being cited as a major reason for the delay.
Moreover, the legal strategies employed by the petitioners have not succeeded in expediting the resolution of the case.
Initially, objections were raised against Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, leading to his withdrawal from the bench. This setback significantly hindered progress for several months. Subsequently, the petitioners' counsel requested the bench to refer the matter to a committee for the formation of a larger bench.
However, it seemed that the bench itself was inclined towards a similar course of action and took advantage of the petitioners' request to refer the matter to the committee for further consideration.
"We only needed to convince three judges in the six-member larger bench, and the final outcome could have been in our favor. Unfortunately, most of the petitioners failed to understand the situation and called for the bench to be expanded," a counsel representing a petitioner against the trial of civilians in military courts stated.
A lawyer emphasizes that ultimately, it is the responsibility of the bench to expedite the decision in this case.
He suggests that it cannot be dismissed that the bench may have intentionally delayed the matter.
Interestingly, one consequence of the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act 2023 is the suspension of a significant judgment against the trial of civilians by a six-member larger bench.
There are serious concerns about the selection of judges assigned to hear this case. It remains unclear why a bench comprising the most senior judges was excluded from the larger bench overseeing the government's ICAs.
On April 24, the larger bench once again postponed the issue to the committee for discussions on the composition of the bench.
Certain members of the bench expressed their intention to review the decisions of military courts to ensure that due process is followed.
