The Martial Law regime of Gen. Zia in 1980s was notorious for military courts that were used to suppress political dissent and other civil liberties. These courts were condemned by international community as they reversed the principle of justice — all held suspects were guilty until proven innocent.
Fast forward to 2015, the military courts are back in Pakistan. This time the military courts are being established for two years not by a dictator, but through a constitutional amendment with the full backing of the country’s parliament. The proposal for military trials was part of a 20-point anti-terrorism plan in the aftermath of a brutal assault by Taleban on a Peshawar school that left over 130 children dead.
The unfortunate Peshawar school incident was a grim reminder that terrorist outfits in Pakistan still had the audacity and capability to strike back with force. In these unprecedented circumstances, the country had to take extraordinary steps to ensure a safer future for the coming generations. Recalling some bitter experiences of the past, some national parties reluctantly voted for the proposal on assurance that “military courts will only take the cases approved by the federal government.”
Most political parties enthusiastically supported military courts on grounds that anti-terrorism courts and Pakistan Protection Ordinance had failed to achieve the desired objectives. The military courts are being pitched as a relief for Pakistan’s slow and overburdened judicial system. A weak system of investigation and prosecution has meant that conviction rates of terrorism suspects has been very low. As a result, the trust level in criminal justice system has been lost and it is not viewed as a reliable partner in the fight against terrorism. The military courts present a quick solution to the problem of expediting judicial reforms in Pakistan. However, there is a real danger that the country’s apex court may not be comfortable with a parallel justice system that may subdue its authority.
While Gen. Raheel Sharif, Pakistan’s Army chief, has assured that military trials will only be held for “jet black terrorists,” the creation of these courts is being viewed with caution by many. Several political analysts and human right groups have lashed out at the government for approving the establishment of military courts. They fear about the prospects of miscarriage of justice and growing military interference in the affairs of a democratically elected government. Terming the decision a breach of an individual’s legal and constitutional rights, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) has expressed its reservation that political dissidents in insurgency-hit Balochistan province could become targets of these courts. This, in turn, would aggravate the plight of smaller provinces and other marginalized groups who feel unduly punished by the State. In such a scenario, some mainstream political parties may withdraw their support for the controversial courts.
There is no doubt that the military courts will come under constant scrutiny and face tough challenges in dispensing a fair trial for terrorism cases. It is hoped that the military and political leadership will work together to adopt democratic norms and curb terrorism from the society otherwise the military courts will prove to be counterproductive.
