SC shown video clips of militants’ acts of savagery

Published June 25, 2015
A number of relatives of the students who had lost their lives in the attack on APS Peshawar attended the hearing. —AP/File
A number of relatives of the students who had lost their lives in the attack on APS Peshawar attended the hearing. —AP/File

ISLAMABAD: The presence of heartbroken parents and the screening of video clips showing militants’ acts of savagery were the two distinct features of Wednesday’s hearing by a 17-judge full court of petitions challenging the establishment of military courts.

A number of close relatives of the students who had lost their lives in the Dec 16, 2014, attack on the Army Public School (APS) in Peshawar and some members of the APS Shuhada Forum attended the hearing.

The video clips showed Mullah Fazlullah inciting violence in Pushto language and asking people to wage war against Pakistan, and Daesh leaders referring to different cities of Pakistan in Arabic language with the seal of the Holy Prophet in a black background. Other clips showed militants putting personnel of the armed forces before a firing squad, beheading them and playing football with their heads.


Parents of school attack victims attend hearing of petitions against military courts


The parents later told Dawn that they had come to the court to support the 21st Amendment under which military courts were set up to try hardened terrorists.

“We want speedy justice by military courts and demand that the terrorists who were arrested after the Peshawar carnage should be among the first to be hanged,” Raheem Afridi, the coordinator of the APS Shuhada Forum, said, adding that 50 parents and members of the forum had attended the court proceedings.

Asked who had invited them, he said they had met Attorney General Salman Aslam Butt and were told that they could come and watch the hearing.

Shahana Ajoon, mother of slain Asfand, said: “We are satisfied with what the military courts are doing.”

After the showing of video clips, the attorney general said these militants had declared a war against Pakistan and that was the reason the Pakistan Army Act (PAA) 1952 had been amended and military courts established under the 21st Amendment to try people like these.

“They are neither loyal to the state of Pakistan as commanded by Article 5 of the Constitution nor they recognise the country,” he contended.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa said he wondered what the state was doing when these people were declaring themselves Amirul Momineen or Khalifa and asked whether the government had declared Daesh as a proscribed organisation. If the answer was in the affirmative then why they were

not being criminalised and, if the answer was in the negative, then why, he asked.

The AG said he would produce before the court the notification describing Daesh as a proscribed outfit.

“From where these have emerged and who are responsible for their creation,” Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja wondered and recalled the period when there was no difference between Sunni and Shia sects.

The AG said the answer to these questions could be provided in-camera, and not in open court. “If we fail to control them our next generation will remain in danger,” he said, adding that the PAA was put under the First Schedule through the 21st Amendment against the backdrop of these brutalities where militants had been openly attacking the armed forces. Justice Isa said that when the trial in absentia could be held under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) of 1997 then why it was not being done and asked why the state was not convicting these people by filing FIRs when the existing structure of the ATA could deal with such issues.

“Is there any bar that these peoples cannot be put under trial before the military courts,” the AG asked. He argued that the ATA had been invoked against the terrorists, but these militants were waging war against the state. Even officers of the level of brigadiers were fighting in the battlefield, he added.

The AG cited a recent development where an anti-terrorism court acquitted those who had been accused of attacking child education activist Malala Yousafzai.

“Maybe not enough evidence was produced before the court which led to the acquittal of these accused,” the court observed.

“Are we treading the course of the state necessity,” Justice Khawaja wondered and asked what proceedings had so far been done under the PAA. The attorney general said the PAA had its own procedure and the military courts which in fact were the Field General Court Martial had similar procedure like ordinary courts, where the accused were charge-sheeted, had the choice to appoint their own counsel, cross-examination, provision of evidence, etc.

“It means the difference is only of the presiding officers,” Justice Asif Saeed Khosa said.

Justice Saqib Nisar asked whether or not the very existence of the state should be the core value of the constitution. “We are talking of the basic structure of the constitution and democracy but if there is no state, these things are meaningless,” he observed.

Justice Khawaja said there was no state without constitution.

Published in Dawn, June 25th, 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play

Opinion

Editorial

Judiciary’s SOS
Updated 28 Mar, 2024

Judiciary’s SOS

The ball is now in CJP Isa’s court, and he will feel pressure to take action.
Data protection
28 Mar, 2024

Data protection

WHAT do we want? Data protection laws. When do we want them? Immediately. Without delay, if we are to prevent ...
Selling humans
28 Mar, 2024

Selling humans

HUMAN traders feed off economic distress; they peddle promises of a better life to the impoverished who, mired in...
New terror wave
Updated 27 Mar, 2024

New terror wave

The time has come for decisive government action against militancy.
Development costs
27 Mar, 2024

Development costs

A HEFTY escalation of 30pc in the cost of ongoing federal development schemes is one of the many decisions where the...
Aitchison controversy
Updated 27 Mar, 2024

Aitchison controversy

It is hoped that higher authorities realise that politics and nepotism have no place in schools.