Or reform the criminal justice system?
The government must implement the quantifiable steps needed to ensure real progress in strengthening the criminal justice system by addressing the issues of long trials and improving the police force and forensics system
The revival of military courts indicates the legislative failures of the government in bringing significant reforms in the criminal justice system.
Pakistan empowered military courts in Jan 2015 as a ‘temporary solution’ to be operational for a period of two years, during which the government could strengthen the criminal justice system.
Conforming to the ‘sunset clause’ the amendments expired in Jan 2017. These amendments expanded the military’s jurisdiction over civilians allowing military courts to try terrorism-related offences committed by those who claim to or belong to a terrorist organisation “using the name of religion or a sect”.
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) have voiced strong objections to the bill proposed by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N).
Under the new amendments, the government has decided to remove the clause conditioning terrorism related to “religion or sect” and give ‘exceptional’ powers to the military courts for three more years to try civilians for anti-state activities.
The developments raised concerns that the government might use this amendment for political victimization. However, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) Shah Mehmood Qureshi clarified that the law cannot be used against any member of a political or religious party.
The political disputes surrounding the extension of powers to military courts diverted attention from the debate concerning the incompetence of the conventional judicial system.
Military courts were empowered on a temporary basis in order to provide more time for the government to improve the current legal system so that it can function independently and effectively.
“The government failed to enact necessary reforms to improve the criminal justice system within the two-year period during which the military courts were operating,” said lawyer and PML-Q Senator, SM Zafar, while talking to DNA.
“The civil administration is incapable of maintaining law and order situation”.
The legal system in Pakistan has proved ineffective in providing accountability for terrorism and bringing back military courts further indicates that the government is still not determined to initiate judicial reforms to strengthen the system.
The ‘war on terror’ has been reignited with another military operation and will continue for an indefinite period until terrorism has completely been eliminated from the country.
The short term solution from the government’s behalf comes under question considering that the problem of terrorism does not have a definite expiry date.
“It is crucial to give military courts an expiry date so that it can be acknowledged that the government must improve the regular criminal justice system,” said foreign policy expert Moeed Yusuf while talking to DNA.
“Unless the judicial system is strengthened, empowering the military courts for another three years will result in the net loss in the long run even if it deterred terrorism in the short run”.
Moreover, it is inconclusive whether military courts’ impact on reducing terrorism has been positive during a provisional period for operations.
The recent terror attacks in Pakistan indicate the failings in the implementation of National Action Plan (NAP) also contradicting the success of military courts in reducing the impact of terrorism.
According to a report by International Commission of Jurists, military courts have convicted 274 people in the two years since they have been used to try civilian terror suspects. 161 people were sentenced to death and 113 people were given prison sentences. At least 12 people given death sentences have been hanged.
“Whether the proceedings of military courts resulted in reducing the number of terrorists is an open question,” said Moeed Yusuf. “However, heavy-handed security forces dealing with the civilians leads to radicalisation”.
The civilian justice system has failed to provide speedy trials of terrorists and providing adequate protection to the stakeholders directly involved in terrorism-related cases.
Due to the high risks involved in dealing with cases related to terrorism, the government used the factor of lack of safety available to the civil legal system compared to the military establishment as an excuse for further extending the military jurisdiction.
“New laws need to be made in order to provide adequate protection to judges, courts, witnesses, and prosecutors,” said SM Zafar. “It is the responsibility of the police and judicial system to bring justice to the victims of terrorism”.
In May 2016, the National Assembly (lower house of parliament) passed a bill to strengthen the criminal justice system and “root out the evil of terrorism with exemplary deterrence”.
The government must implement the quantifiable steps needed to ensure real progress in strengthening the criminal justice system by addressing the issues of long trials and improving the police force and forensics system.
The discord between the police, prosecution, and the jurisdiction must be addressed in order to reach the point where military courts are no longer needed.
