The Supreme Court questioned how a civilian could be court-martialled and said the trial of Col Inamul Raheim (retd) under the Pakistan Army Act is a violation of the Constitution and the Supreme Court judgments. A three-member bench, headed by Justice Mushir Alam, heard the Ministry of Defence's petition against the Lahore High Court (LHC) order dated January 9, 2020, regarding detention of Col Inam (retd).
The retired army officer-turned-lawyer was picked up by a security agency from his home in Rawalpindi on December 17, 2019. He, however, was released on January 24, 2020, following the assurance given by ex-AGP Anwar Mansoor Khan to the apex court. Justice Mirza Viqas Rauf of the LHC, Rawalpindi bench, on January 9 had declared the detention of Col Inam (retd), illegal, and ordered his immediate release.
"The detention of Inamul Rahiem, advocate, with the army authorities is illegal and unlawful. He shall be released forthwith," said the order. Justice Muneeb Akhtar asked how a civilian could be court-martialled. He also asked how in civil matters the army officers can be tried under the Army Act.
The crimes of civil nature either committed by an ordinary citizen or by an army officer are needed to be tried in a sessions court. He said without the permission of the federal government the court martial of civil crime could not be held. It is the responsibility of the military courts before holding trial to determine whether the crime is of civil nature or falls under the Army Act. Justice Muneeb said that the military court had power to halt court martial proceedings in civil crimes. The commanding officer, before holding the trial, should determine whether the crime is triable under the Army Act or the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. Justice Muneeb said the Supreme Court had made it clear through various judgments that civilians could not be court-martialled. For doing that, he added, the Constitution needs to be amended.
Court martial of Col Inam (retd) is violation of the Supreme Court's orders.
Justice Mushir inquired how the Official Secrets Act, 1923, was applicable on him. He said that serious allegations were levelled against the retired colonel, who was later released by the army itself and not on court's orders.
Earlier, Additional Attorney General Sajid Ilyas informed the apex court bench that Col Inam had been released, but was still under investigation.
He said the reasons for his release were different. Justice Mushir remarked that whatever the reasons were, the allegations against him were very serious.
Director (Legal) Ministry of Defence Brig Flak Naz wanted to explain the point but the court stopped him from arguing, saying that in the presence of the federation's counsel he could not plead the case.
Justice Muneeb said that without the permission of the bench and the additional attorney general he could not be allowed to speak in the court. The AAG, Sajid Ilyas, said the Lahore High Court had announced a detailed judgment, adding some points had been raised in the judgment therefore he required some time to respond to them.
He said after getting instructions from the relevant authorities a reply will be submitted. Justice Mushir accepting the request of the AAG, adjourned the case for three weeks. He, however, directed the additional attorney general to come prepared on sections 94 and 95 of the Army Act, 1952 and Section 549 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
Comments
Comments are closed.