In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has ruled to nullify the civilian trial in military courts. This significant judgment comes after a rigorous legal process that engaged a five-member large bench, with Supreme Court Justice Aajjaz Al-Hassan presiding. The bench included esteemed justices Maneeb Akhtar, Ahmed Afridi, Mohammad Ali Akbar Naqvi, and Aaishhu Malk.

Justice Aajjaz Al-Hassan, reading the concise judgment, revealed that the decision passed with a majority of four to one, with Justice Ahmed Afridi dissenting from the majority’s ruling. The ruling particularly declared Section 2D One as unconstitutional.

Hearing on May 9 instance

In effect, the verdict unequivocally states that military courts can not hold civilian trials, emphasizing that the trial of 103 individuals linked to events on May 9th must be conducted solely in criminal courts.

At the outset of the hearing, lawyer Salman Akram Raju highlighted instances of military courts initiating trials for civilians despite previous assurances. In response, Justice Aajzaz Al-Hassan expressed awareness of the matter and announced the court’s intention to hear the Attorney General.

During the proceedings, Attorney General Usman Mansoor assured the court that all requirements of Article 10A of the Pakistani Constitution would be met. He stated that appeals would be filed in the High Court and later in the Supreme Court. Additionally, the Attorney General referenced various judicial decisions and argued that military courts could address prohibited areas and attacks on buildings.

In response, the Chief Justice inquired whether a constitutional amendment was necessary to distinguish between the trial of terrorists and common citizens. The Attorney General contended that such an amendment was unnecessary as long as the accused had direct links with the Armed Forces.

Army act relates to corruption within Armed forces

Justice Aaishhu Malik pointed out that the Army Act deals primarily with issues related to corruption within the armed forces, and Justice Mohammad Ali Naqvi urged the Attorney General to review the Army Act cover. Justice Aajzaz Al-Hassan emphasized that the law was evidently crafted for individuals within the armed forces and questioned how its connection with the civilian population could be established.

The Attorney General argued that the Army Act also encompasses officers who prevent others from performing their duties, even civilians. However, Justice Aaishhu Malk questioned the potential implications for fundamental rights in such circumstances.

The Attorney General clarified that the Army Act includes those who occasionally serve with the armed forces. Justice Aajzaz Hassan countered that this pertained solely to service matters, but the Attorney General maintained that the Constitution recognized that individuals preventing members of the Armed Forces from performing their duties might also be civilians.

Justice Aaishhu Malk reminded that the Constitution and the law bound the armed forces to perform their duties while safeguarding fundamental rights, making it clear that the law applied to those who disrupted the armed forces.

The Attorney General cited the definition of “relation to the armed forces” and promised to provide additional arguments, explaining the necessity of military courts in the Liaquat Hussain case.

As the proceedings concluded, the court allowed written arguments from the Attorney General and also noted the involvement of Shah Khawar as the lawyer representing several ministers.

The court, while rejecting nine separate applications on the grounds of withdrawal, reserved its decision concerning the trial of civilians in military courts.

In a dramatic turn of events, an application has been submitted to halt the criminal proceedings against Imran Khan, former Pak PM and PTI Chief in the Cypher case, invoking the Official Secrets Act. Special Court Judge, Abu Hasanat Twalekaranin, presided over this high-stakes hearing held within the former prison.

The formal application to cease the criminal proceedings was submitted by Vokla Safai, while Prosecutor Shah Khawar vehemently opposed this move. The case involves a total of 28 witnesses, with plans to summon government witnesses following the alleged offense.

Prosecutor Shah Khawar argued that this application is merely an attempt to delay the proceedings, emphasizing that today’s hearing is solely focused on addressing the criminal offense. Khawar urged the court to dismiss the application and proceed with the criminal charges.

Former Foreign Minister Shah Mahmoud Qureshi is also implicated in the case, with a charge sheet prepared and delivered to both accused parties. Chairman PTI and Shah Mahmoud Qureshi have acknowledged receipt and affixed their signatures to the documents.

The hearing of the Cypher case unfolded under extraordinarily strict security measures outside the court jail premises, reflecting the gravity and sensitivity of the matter.

Tensions in the region reached a boiling point today as the Palestinian resistance organization, Hamas repulsed an Israeli attack and engaged in a ground clash at the Gaza-Israel border near Khan Younis. Notably, it is 19th day of Israel’s ongoing military operation in Gaza, during which more than 4,700 lives have been lost, with 40 percent of the casualties being innocent children and over 16,000 people sustaining injuries, as reported by international human rights organizations.

The clash unfolded when Israeli forces attempted to breach the Gaza border, with the intent of reaching the iron fence that separates Gaza from Tel Aviv. According to reports from international media, the Al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas’ military wing, fiercely repelled the Israeli incursion, forcing Israeli soldiers to abandon their vehicles and retreat.

Confirmations of attack

According to reports Hamas successfully thwarted the Israeli attack and army’s attempt to enter Gaza, a significant development in the ongoing conflict. Israel acknowledged the engagement and reported one soldier killed and three others wounded.

The Israeli army’s push toward the iron fence separating Gaza and Tel Aviv culminated in an attack on an Israeli tank by the Al-Qassam Brigades. The tank came under intense fire, exacerbating the already high-stakes situation on the border.

This incident serves as a stark reminder of the relentless violence that has marred this region for weeks, with both sides enduring significant losses. The toll on the civilian population, particularly the loss of innocent children’s lives, has drawn condemnation from international human rights organizations.

Efforts towards a ceasefire or a de-escalation of hostilities have yet to yield substantial results, leaving residents of Gaza and Israel in a state of perpetual fear and instability.

As the conflict rages on, the world watches with bated breath, hoping for a swift end to the violence and a path towards lasting peace in the region.

In response to the escalating Israeli-Palestinian conflict, China has dispatched a naval task force consisting of six Chinese warships to the Middle East. According to Chinese media, the task force, including the Type 052D guided missile destroyer Zebo, the frigate Jingzhou, and the supply ship Qingdao, recently conducted joint exercises with Oman’s navy before heading to an undisclosed location.

The deployment of the Chinese naval task force follows the earlier dispatch of the USS Gerald R. Ford by the United States to the Middle East in support of Israel after a Hamas attack on October 7. The situation in the region remains tense, and the presence of both American and Chinese warships raises questions about the potential impact on regional dynamics and ongoing efforts to address the conflict.

This comes in the wake of various attacks on US assets in the Middle East, including Iraq and Syria. The developments underscores the possibility of more aggravated bipolar clashes if escalation continues.

Though a paramilitary federal law enforcement force and part of Pakistan’s civil armed forces, Pakistan Rangers is officered and administratively controlled by the Pakistan Army, which makes it Rawalpindi’s most trusted asset for performing ‘extraordinary’ operations throughout the country in order to preserve the military’s supremacy.

It goes to the credit of Pakistan Rangers that it has lived up to expectations of the military’s top brass by implicitly following orders, even when they are patently illegal and one such example is the 20 days long Faizabad Interchange sit-in organised by Tehreek-e-Labbaik [TLP], a far-right Islamic extremist political party in 2017 that held the Nawaz Sharif government hostage and blocked the major highway in the capital city.

A week and a half into the Faizabad sit-in, Islamabad High Court ordered authorities to clear the Faizabad blockade. Al Jazeera quoted Mushtaq Ahmed, a top local administration official saying that “We have been told to enlist the services of the Rangers and FC [Frontier Corps] as well, if required.” [Emphasis added]. He revealed that “We have been told to clear the protest, by hook or by crook.” On November 25, 2017, the government issued a notification calling-in the military to control law and order in the national capital and the army- Rangers duo did just that by pandering to the protesters!

The sit-in ended after the Rangers brokered a shamefully populist agreement with TLP that saw Director General of Punjab Rangers Maj-Gen Azhar Navid Hayat distributing cash envelopes to protesters and even expressing solidarity with them. Another embarrassing highlight of this agreement was that while it was signed by Pakistan’s Interior Minister and the Interior Secretary, it was the then Director General Inter Services Intelligence [ISI] Maj Gen Faiz Hameed who endorsed his signatures as ‘Guarantor’.

While the entire Faizabad sit-in episode does reveal an ISI-Rangers nexus, inclusion of the sentence- “We are thankful to him [army chief Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa] as he has saved the nation from facing a huge disaster,” in the agreement leaves no room for any doubts. And with DG ISI endorsing the agreement the first sentence of which reads “Tehreek-i-Labbaik Ya Rasool Allah is a peaceful party and does not believe in violence and unrest,” it’s clear that Rawalpindi has no issues with this fundamentalist entity.

Just three years after the Faizabad sit-in, Pakistan Rangers once again grabbed headlines when they behaved with the arrogance reminiscent of Nazi storm troopers. In what came to be known as the infamous 2020 ‘Karachi incident’, Rangers alongwith ISI officers abducted Inspector General of Police [IGP] Sindh  Mushtaq Mahar and compelled him to sign an arrest warrant for Nawaz Sharif’s son-in-law on charges of allegedly “violating the sanctity of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s mausoleum.”

Subsequent removal of officers involved in the Sindh IGP’s abduction from their assignments confirms that ISI and Rangers were guilty of committing a criminal act and as this tarnished the Army’s image, one expected that the defaulters would be dealt with severely. However, with Pakistan army’s media wing Inter Services Public Relations [ISPR] pronouncing that the officers involved had merely reacted “rather overzealously” it’s amply clear that the unlawful actions of the Rangers were condoned and this reveals the unbelievingly high degree of Rawalpindi’s patronage that Rangers enjoy!

Five months ago, the Rangers once again came into limelight for arresting and abducting former Prime Minister Imran Khan from Islamabad High Court premises. While this action was sanctioned by the competent authority, using Rangers rather than the police for bundling away a prominent citizen who had come to court to appear in another case is, to say the least, illegal and in extremely poor taste.

This highly provocative act expectedly proved to be the proverbial last straw that broke the camel’s back and Khan’s enraged supporters took to the streets triggering the May 9 anti-army protests riots. Surprisingly, while Rawalpindi is going hammer and tongs after PTI leaders and rioters, it has not even considered it necessary to inquire as to why Rangers [which is a paramilitary force commanded by Pakistan army officers] were used to make this routine arrest and that too in the highly secure court environs?

The recent operation in Sindh’s Sakrand village launched by Sindh Rangers on September 28 is yet another addition to its hall of shame. In this action, innocent civilians were killed and injured due to indiscriminate firing, which exposed the cavalier ways of this trigger happy paramilitary force. Differing versions of this incident given out by Sindh Rangers, police and locals lend credence to suspicions of a massive cover-up to shield the culprits.

In its statement, the Sindh Rangers claimed that this operation was conducted as “There were reports of high-value criminals in possession of explosives and firearms,” and maintained that “Upon seeing Rangers and police, the armed miscreants opened fire, injuring four Rangers personnel. In retaliatory fire, three miscreants were killed.” However, the police version is completely different.

Dawn.com quotes Benazirabad Senior Superintendent of Police Hyder Raza saying that the operation was launched to apprehend members of proscribed Sindh Revolutionary Army [SRA] and four civilians were killed in the firing by Rangers. He also expressed ignorance regarding injuries suffered by the Rangers and whether their injured personnel had been admitted in People’s Medical College hospital.

The fact that it’s not clear whether the joint Rangers and police team were seeking out “high value criminals” or SRA fighters is a clear giveaway that something is amiss and the absolutely different version of Sindh United Party [SUP] deepens the mystery. The SUP claims that the Rangers came to  Sakrand alongwith Liaquat Jalbani, a veterinary student who had been arrested earlier and they attempted to arrest and whisk away another innocent local youth named Allahdad Jalbani from his home in the village.  

SUP secretary general Roshan Buriro told Dawn.com that after the Rangers arrived, men, women and children of the village congregated at Allahdad’s residence and the crowd not only prevented the Rangers from arresting Allahdad but even managed to free Liaquat from their custody. This led to the Rangers opening fire on the crowd in which four villagers were killed and an equal number injured. This version appears most plausible.

In all probability, the double humiliation caused by forced ‘release’ of an apprehended youth and preventing the arrest of another person by locals would have most certainly enraged the Rangers and acted as the trigger for unprovoked and indiscriminate firing on unarmed villagers.

The detailed Human Rights Commission of Pakistan [HRCP] investigation report on this incident mentions that, “The mission notes with concern that this security operation, hastily executed and lacking a comprehensive strategy, resulted in chaos and the deaths of four villagers. There are incongruities between the statements of the district police, Rangers, state officials and the residents. While the exact nature of the threat prompting this operation remains unclear, the state and law enforcement officials [Rangers] must take responsibility for the deaths of four civilians and the injuries sustained by others.” [Emphasis added].

By observing that “With no history of such an incident taking place in the village before, and a lack of criminal history against the civilians caught in the crossfire, the actions of the law enforcement personnel involved must be gravely called into question” [Emphasis added], HRCP has placed the Rangers in the dock. It now remains to be seen whether Rawalpindi will act against the Rangers responsible for killing and injuring innocent civilians, or will this cold blooded murder also go unpunished as hitherto fore? 

In a significant development, the accountability court in Islamabad has suspended the permanent arrest warrant of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. Subsequently, the Islamabad High Court has granted him protective bail until October 24. This decision stems from the ongoing case related to Toshakhana vehicles.

Judge Muhammad Bashir of the Accountability Court, in a reserved decision, accepted Nawaz Sharif’s request for suspending the arrest warrant. The court has ordered him to appear before it on October 24. The proceedings began when Nawaz Sharif’s lawyer, Qazi Misbah, appeared in court.

Qazi Misbah Advocate argued that permanent arrest warrants were issued as an advertisement. He added that Nawaz Sharif is returning, and the court has the option to cancel the arrest warrant.

Judge Muhammad Bashir emphasized the need to review the case’s record. NAB prosecutor Sohail Arif also appeared in court.

Qazi Misbah Advocate pointed out that no security bond had been filed in the Islamabad High Court in this case. He likened the situation to the case of Ishaq Dar when the court canceled the warrant on September 9, 2020.

Medical grounds

The court inquired why Nawaz Sharif had not appeared for so long. The lawyer explained that he had been seriously ill when he went abroad, and the Lahore High Court had granted him permission for medical treatment abroad. Pending this matter, they have submitted Nawaz Sharif’s latest medical reports.

NAB Prosecutor Sohail Arif noted that interim relief had been sought in this application.

Nawaz Sharif’s lawyer emphasized that they would appear in court on October 24, and there was no NAB arrest warrant in this case, only a permanent arrest warrant was in effect, and they were willing to appear in court.

The NAB prosecutor clarified that the arrest warrant was solely for the presence of the accused and suggested that Nawaz Sharif could request the Senate to cancel the permanent arrest warrant.

Following arguments from both sides, the court reserved its decision on the application.

Protective Bail

This development pertains to Nawaz Sharif’s protective bail application, which was heard in relation to the Avenfield and Al-Azizia references. Chief Justice Amir Farooq and Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb presided over the hearing.

Nawaz Sharif’s lawyer, Azam Nazir Tarar, mentioned that the accountability court had also canceled the permanent arrest warrant, which had been suspended by the trial court.

The court inquired about the existence of the order, to which Azam Nazir Tarar explained that the order had been issued, and lawyers were coming from the accountability court.

During the proceedings, the court noted that the NAB prosecutor had previously stated they had no objection to the security bond. The NAB prosecutor clarified that their current position was that they had no objections to Nawaz Sharif’s appearance.

After a brief hearing, the Islamabad High Court granted protective bail until October 24, with an order preventing Nawaz Sharif’s arrest upon his return to Pakistan. The court also requested a written response from NAB regarding Nawaz Sharif’s non-objection to protective bail.