Wednesday, January 1, 2025
Islamabad (UrduPoint News International/ Pakistan Point News - 1st Jan, 2025 ) Recently, after the permission of the Supreme Court, military courts sentenced 85 accused of May 9 to sentences ranging from two to ten years. DW conducted research on the trial procedures of military courts, the treatment of accused during detention and access to justice, as a result of which it came to light about the laws prevailing in Pakistan that, according to legal experts, are extremely disturbing and for which it is not possible to provide justice.
Sixty more citizens sentenced to prison by Pakistani military courts
When lawyers and close relatives of those recently convicted by military courts were spoken to, they told us that the way the laws were violated in military courts is on the one hand, but there is also a law in Pakistan that binds lawyers and accused that they cannot even explain the details of the proceedings in military courts and that a case can be filed against anyone who does so.
Which law prevents the disclosure of details of proceedings?
Legal experts said that the Official Secrets Act 1923, a law enacted during the British era, is still in force in Pakistan. Under Section 14 of this law, not only the general public but also the heirs of the accused can be prevented from viewing the court proceedings and people involved in the court proceedings, such as lawyers, can be bound not to disclose details about the proceedings.
Why civilians in military courts?
Hafeezullah Niazi, the father of Hassan Niazi, who is also a lawyer and was sentenced to ten years by military courts, told DW and referring to the Secrets Act that he could not describe the proceedings that he came to know about in the military courts, but he could only say that no legal aspect was taken into account while making decisions and only their own decisions were announced.
“There was no evidence against my son that could have led to a 10-year sentence,” he said. “The witnesses who were presented against Hassan refused to identify Hassan. So they still don’t know on what basis he was sentenced. On some vague video, on controversial tweets or for some other reason?”
He added that it was an injustice that the cases of civilians were being tried in military courts that neither had the resources nor the capacity to hear cases based on evidence.
Hassan presented his own case but a detailed verdict has not yet been provided.
The lawyers said that proceedings that cannot be disclosed cannot be transparent. Khadija Siddiqui, a lawyer who has fought the cases of some accused in military courts, said that this law can be applied to highly sensitive matters, including information about a country's secrets or sensitive military installations, but what the purposes of applying it to ordinary citizens can be, can be deduced by understanding circles themselves.
She said, "If the details of the proceedings are revealed, they are nothing but a joke, so there is a strict ban on telling them. Yes, I would definitely like to tell you that the decisions were made not according to any law but according to will and this will become clearer with time. There is already a debate about the unconstitutionality of these trials, they are also illegal because the testimonies were not taken into account in these decisions.
‘’
Pakistan: Nearly 30 people sentenced to death in a month
It should be noted that DW spoke to many lawyers and heirs about the proceedings of military courts and the treatment of the accused, but most of them excused themselves, saying that talking about military trials would cause difficulties for them and therefore they did not want to talk. Only a few lawyers and heirs of the accused, Hasan’s father Hafizullah Niazi, agreed to talk, and that too on the condition that he would not narrate the entire proceedings.
In addition, the brother of another accuser provided information on the condition of anonymity.
Military courts sentenced 25 accused involved in the May 9 protests
If there is no evidence, how was the sentence given?
The brother of a man convicted by military courts, requesting anonymity, said that his brother was given a six-year sentence after a confession was taken from him.
He said, "My brother could not be convicted on the basis of ambiguous videos in which he was not involved in any vandalism, so a confession was taken from him through torture, for which he was punished. He also told this in code words during the meeting because during the meeting, apart from the cameras, security personnel stood at his head and immediately stopped him from giving any details. Despite the torture, my brother would not give a confession, but when threatened with pulling out his nails, he knew it was better to admit to whatever crime he said to avoid the pain."
The brother of the convicted accuser further said, “My brother is an educated person. He also requested to take his exams during his imprisonment, which was also rejected.
Protesters are protesters, when the gates were opened, they went inside the Corps Commander House or Jinnah House, whatever it is. By doing this, they did not become terrorists, but they were treated even worse. I was very sad when I saw tears of helplessness in my brother’s eyes one day while talking about the violence.”
Suspension of previous verdict against military courts under criticism
The accusers’ lawyers also supported the fact that military courts handed down sentences through confessional statements.
Murad Ali Khan Marwat, another lawyer who fought the case of the accused, said, “Most people were forced to confess and were sentenced on the basis of force and torture.” He added that when there is evidence, there is no need for confession, so “the courts that uphold the law should see what consequences can be created by giving military courts the power to sentence.”
“Was it easy for the accused to access lawyers?”
The accuser’s brother said that there was also a fear among the lawyers. No one was ready to fight our case. Hassan Niazi, who is himself a lawyer and was also facing a military trial, helped us, due to which we got a lawyer. Lawyers also say that most people could not get access to a lawyer because the military courts prevented a lawyer from taking on more than three cases and there were not many lawyers who could fight these cases, so most people had to make do with the lawyer provided by the military.
Khadija Siddiqui says, “There is no law that prevents a lawyer from fighting a case for more than three people, but they had their own law there. The only answer to everything was that this is our law.”
Pakistan: Senators protest against the resolution against the Supreme Court’s decision
Is there any hope for the convicted people?
Khadija Siddiqui says that no one has been provided with a detailed decision yet, whereas according to the law, it is necessary to provide it so that it is known who has been convicted for what crime.
Everyone has been forced to sign mercy petitions, and that is also an attempt to prove them guilty in a way, as only those who are guilty of a crime can apply for mercy. She said, “The only hope is that the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court will uphold the court’s old decision under which military courts cannot try civilians. The Supreme Court’s permission to the military courts to pronounce judgment is subject to the Supreme Court’s decision on the intra-court review petition regarding the powers of the military courts. In case the old judgment is upheld, the decisions of the military courts may be null and void.”
Comments
Post a Comment