Skip to main content

Supreme Court Drama: Military Courts and Mayhem – A Theatrical Tale


 In a surprising twist of legal theatrics, the Supreme Court of the land is preparing for a blockbuster sequel to its earlier verdict on the May 9 riots. A star-studded six-judge larger bench, led by the indomitable Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, is set to take the stage on December 15 to hear appeals against its own unanimous declaration that the trial of civilians in military courts is as unconstitutional as a cat trying to herd sheep.

The ensemble cast of this legal drama includes Justices Aminuddin Khan, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Musarrat Hilali, and Irfan Saadat Khan, each playing their roles with the gravity of Shakespearean actors, only with more legal jargon and fewer soliloquies.

In the previous episode on October 23, a five-judge bench, featuring Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Mazahir Naqvi, and Justice Ayesha Malik, decided that 103 accused individuals should face the music under ordinary criminal laws. This prompted appeals from various caretaker governments faster than you can say "contempt of court."

The caretaker federal government and interim setups in Punjab, Balochistan, and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, feeling a bit left out, threw their appeals into the legal cauldron. Meanwhile, the Sindh government, like the calm character in every good drama, denied any involvement in the challenge.

Adding more spice to the plot, the defense ministry jumped into the fray with an appeal, desperately requesting the top court to hit the pause button on its October 23 verdict. A contempt of court petition against Defence Secretary Lt Gen (retd) Hamooduz Zaman Khan was also filed, alleging he ignored the court's orders like a student ignoring their homework.

The interim federal government's appeal read like a thrilling novel, describing the May 9 attacks as "targeted attacks" in an "organized and coordinated manner." It's almost like they were describing a military operation, not a riot. The plea argued that the Supreme Court's judgment was coram non judice, a fancy legal term meaning "you did this without the right paperwork."

In a surprising plot twist, the appeal contended that the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act had been declared ultra vires the Constitution and was now as relevant as last season's fashion. This legal fashion faux pas supposedly rendered the entire bench's constitution in violation of prescribed procedures, making the judgment a nullity in the eye of the law.

As the legal curtains rise on December 15, we eagerly await the next act in this gripping legal saga. Will Justice Sardar Tariq Masood deliver a monologue that leaves us in stitches, or will the defense secretary emerge as the unexpected hero? Stay tuned for the next episode of "As the Court Turns," where justice is served with a side of legal comedy.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

ECP vs PTI: The Great 'Bat'-tle - A Comedy of Symbolic Proportions

  In the latest episode of the gripping political sitcom, "As the Election Symbol Turns," the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) seems to have developed an unexpected phobia – an acute fear of bats. No, not the flying nocturnal creatures, but the electoral symbol of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). It all started when the Peshawar High Court (PHC) delivered a verdict that left the ECP in a state of shock and awe. The court, channeling its inner superhero, swooped in and decreed that PTI could keep its beloved 'bat' symbol, much to the dismay of the ECP, which is now contemplating its own superhero move – a daring appeal to the Supreme Court. Picture this: ECP officials in capes, armed with legal briefs and grappling hooks, preparing to challenge the mighty 'bat' in the hallowed halls of justice. It's a bird! It's a plane! No, it's the ECP, ready to face the daunting foe – a winged mammal holding a cricket bat. The high-stakes saga began when the ...

The Role of Foul Language in Escalating Political Turmoil in Pakistan

  In recent times, the political landscape of Pakistan has been marred by increasing tensions and confrontations among political parties. The use of foul language and derogatory remarks has become a prevalent feature, contributing significantly to the present turmoil. The recent comments made by PML-N Chief Organiser Maryam Nawaz, labeling the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) as a "terrorist party," highlight the sharp rhetoric that has characterized political discourse. This article delves into the impact of foul language on the political climate, its consequences, and the need for a more constructive dialogue. The Weaponization of Language: The political arena in Pakistan has witnessed a disturbing trend of language being weaponized for political gains. Maryam Nawaz's choice of words, accusing the PTI of being a "terrorist party" and referencing the recent controversy over the party's electoral symbol, adds fuel to an already fiery environment. Such language...

Judicial Drama Unveiled: Pakistan's Supreme Soap Opera

  In a stunning plot twist that even the most seasoned soap opera writers would find hard to believe, the latest season of "Justice Chronicles: Pakistan Edition" has introduced a new character—Justice Syed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi. In a move that would make legal dramas everywhere envious, Justice Naqvi has taken center stage by filing a petition against the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) and claiming that the complaints against him are nothing more than a politically motivated script. Cue the dramatic music as Justice Naqvi contends that he's just a humble actor, sorry, judge, fulfilling his solemn duty to protect and safeguard the Constitution. It seems the delay in the general elections in the provincial assembly of Punjab is the perfect backdrop for this courtroom drama. Move over, Shakespeare—this is a tale of political intrigue and financial misconduct accusations that puts Hamlet to shame. In a petition submitted under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, Justice Naq...