MoD lawyer tells SC: May 9 ‘conspirators’, ‘masterminds’ will be tried in military court

ISLAMABAD: The counsel of Ministry of Defence informed that the cases of “conspirators” and “masterminds” of the 9th May riots will also be tried by the military court under the Army Act.

A seven-member constitutional bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, on Tuesday, heard the intra-court appeals (ICAs) challenging the trial of civilians in military courts.

During the proceeding, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi questioned whether there was any nexus between protesters and army personnel, as they (the civilians) entered into Corps Commander House, without any resistance. He asked whether any army officer was tried under Army Act for 9th May incidents.

Advocate Khawaja Haris, representing the Ministry of Defence, told that no army officer has been tried in that regard. However, he submitted that “masterminds” who hatched the May 9 conspiracy would also be tried under the Army Act in military courts, adding the trial of civilians had not started suddenly, as the law had been in place since 1967.

Khawaja Haris presented Sheikh Liaquat Hussain’s case as an example of a civilian being tried in military court.

Justice Rizvi questioned; “How did the people reach the corps commander’s house without any weapons, why there was no resistance to stop the protesters,” adding that resistance does not always mean use of force or resort to firing, but some negotiation or talks could have taken place to dissuade rioters from entering the Commander House. He said the intrusion of protesters into the Corps Commander House on May 9, 2023, was undeniably a “security breach”.

The Defence Ministry’s lawyer responded that complete restraint had been exercised to avoid loss of life.

Khawaja Haris argued that for nexus it is not always necessary that one (civilian) should have friend in the army to commit an offence under Army Act, adding nexus is also interference in discharge of duties by army personnel and maintaining discipline. “If I steal weapons from the army house then would it mean I have a nexus with some army personnel?”

The Defence Ministry’s counsel said the charge against the protesters was that they had damaged the property. He said military courts have been recognised in the constitution, and they do not fall under the category of Article 175A of the constitution.

Justice Mandokhail questioned, “If a soldier’s rifle is stolen, where the case will be filed?” The Defence Ministry’s lawyer replied that the rifle was a soldier’s weapon of war. Justice Mandokhail then said that the court wanted to see under what circumstances a civilian be tried under the Army Act, questioning its jurisdiction. He told the counsel the way you are expanding the scope of the Army Act then anti-narcotics case would also be dealt under Army Act.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar noted that both the accused in FB Ali case were civilians, as the case against the accused was initiated after their retirement. Justice Rizvi asked the Defence Ministry’s lawyer “to keep in mind that the FB Ali case was from the era of civilian martial law, with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto as the civilian martial law administrator.”

Justice Mussarat Hilali inquired; “If a civilian enters into army instalment and steals weapons for his own personal benefit. Similarly, if a soldier has a dispute with a civilian in a cantonment, where will their cases go?” The Defence Ministry’s lawyer replied that disputes were different, and after examining all the circumstances it could be decided where the case should go.

Justice Mazhar said that if a person enters into a prohibited place and steals radio, map or sketches then his case would fall under Official Secrets Act. He pointed out that the Official Secrets Act lists which crimes fall under military court’s jurisdiction.

Justice Hilali noted that during the May 9 and 10 events, some protesters were unaware of what was happening. The Defence Ministry’s lawyer clarified that those unaware were not tried in military courts.

Khawaja Haris also argued that even in times of peace, civilians intervening in military affairs would face trials in military courts. Justice Rizvi questioned, “There must be a mastermind behind it; who orchestrated the conspiracy?”

The hearing was adjourned until today (Wednesday).

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025