Latest news with #Anti-TerrorismCourts
Business Recorder
15-05-2025
- Business Recorder
May 9 cases: ATCs step up hearings
LAHORE: The Anti-Terrorism Courts (ATCs) in Lahore have stepped up the hearing of May 9 riot cases after directives from the Supreme Court to wind them up within four months. The hearing of May 9 riot cases will now be heard four days a week, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Saturday. The Lahore High Court registrar issued the new amended schedule of May 9 riot cases being conducted at Kot Lakhpat Jail. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
18-04-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
May 9 trials deadline sparks concerns
The apex court has finally issued a written order, directing anti-terrorism courts (ATCs) to conclude the trial of accused persons involved in May 9 incidents within a period of four months. The court, however, ordered ATCs to ensure that the rights of the accused-respondents to a fair trial should not be hindered in any manner whatsoever. "We are mindful of subsection 7 of Section 19 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, where a trial is to be concluded within seven days by the Anti-Terrorism Courts, and the failure to do so entails duty on the Anti-Terrorism Court to inform the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned for appropriate directions," says a three-page written order issued in one of the case wherein state had approached the apex court seeking cancelation of trials. "However, in light of the peculiar circumstances, notably the large number of accused persons, the multiplicity of cases arising from the cases of similar nature reported separately and the considerable number of prosecution witnesses, we direct that the trial in the instant case be concluded within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order," the order adds. "We further direct the Anti-Terrorism Court to ensure that the rights of the accused-respondents to a fair trial should not be hindered in any manner whatsoever." Instead of deciding dozens of bail matters on merit, the three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi has opted different way by direction ATCs to conclude trials in May 9 cases within four months. PTI legal team is already expressing apprehension over the written order for its likely misuse against accused persons. Senior lawyers say that it seems SC did not learn lesson from Panama case wherein deadline was given to conclude the trials of Sharif family. Later SC was being blamed to provide facilitation to convict Sharif family members. Earlier, Punjab Prosecution Department submitted a report in the apex court wherein it was told that total 319 FIRs were registered in different provinces of Punjab. As many as 35,962 accused persons were nominated wherein 11,367 were arrested. 24,595 accused are at large. Final challans are submitted in 307 cases. The order notes that the court has been informed that, in some cases, the accused-respondents have been nominated in multiple FIRs, leading to trials, which are pending before various Anti-Terrorism Courts. "Consequently, it may not be possible for them to appear in person before all of the courts, and therefore, their applications for exemption, if any, should be considered in accordance with the law. "Similarly, we have also been informed that in some cases the accused-respondents have not been provided the copies of the charge and the testimony of prosecution witnesses, which require them to prepare effective defence as mandated under the enabling provisions of the law and Article 10-A of the Constitution" "This aspect of the matter also requires attention of the Anti-Terrorism Courts. In addition, the complaints regarding the venue of the Anti-Terrorism Courts, if any, should be considered by the respective Chief Justices of the High Courts and the Administrative Judges of the Anti-Terrorism Courts." For the compliance of the directions, the order said that the concerned provincial chief justices, if they deem appropriate, may call fortnightly report from the Anti-Terrorism Courts/Administrative Judges of the Anti-Terrorism Courts to ensure that not only the proceedings are carried out expeditiously and in accordance with law, but also the rights to fair trial of the accused-respondents are not hindered in any manner, whatsoever. However, this order shall not preclude the prosecution from renewing its plea if any of abuse of bail or non-cooperation by the accused is brought on record, in consequence thereof, the might of the law is to prevail, says the order. Commenting about the order, ex-federal minister Chaudhry Fawad Hussain says that the Supreme Court has, in this case, functioned more as an administrative body rather than a judicial one. "In essence, the order issued is purely administrative and lacks any judicial direction. Each paragraph of the order contradicts the others. For instance, while one section mandates the completion of trials within four months, another requires ATC judges to adhere to all procedural requirements and ensure the protection of the accused's rights. This presents a clear dilemma: how few judges will handle cases involving 24,000 accused individuals within four months while simultaneously safeguarding their rights? The order is inconsequential and will not be implemented," he adds. Sameer Khosa, who was counsel of accused persons, said that the concern has always been that the accused before the Anti-Terrorism Courts should receive a fair trial. "The May 9 trials have clearly been used as a tool of political engineering with those deserting a political party completely absolved of all charges. In this situation it is clear that any independent and fair adjudication in these cases is sure to absolve the many of the accused." Khosa further states that a direction to conclude the trials from the Supreme Court can have the tendency to encourage the Anti-Terrorism Courts to trample over the rights of accused by not giving adequate time to cross examine and put up a defence. This was brought up before the Supreme Court and one can only hope that the trial courts as well as the High Courts will implement the portions of the judgement that categorically state that the rights of the accused are protected in every manner," says Sameer Khosa advocate.
Express Tribune
27-02-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
CB judge questions identical wording in ATC rulings
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar observed that the wording in the verdicts of Anti-Terrorism Courts (ATCs) in Lahore and Islamabad regarding the transfer of May 9 accused to military custody was identical. This prompted Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel to remark that it seems ATC judges were weak in English. A seven-member Constitutional Bench led by Justice Amin ud-Din Khan heard intra-court appeals challenging the trial of civilians in military court. At the outset of the hearing, Civil Society lawyer Faisal Siddiqui argued that commanding officers had submitted requests to transfer the May 9 accused for military trial. He noted that the request began with a sentence that it was an official secret case as per initial investigation, said Faisal Siddiqui. "This is an admission by the commanding officer that the investigation was incomplete," Siddiqui asserted. He further argued that the ATC's reasoning for transferring the accused to military custody fare absurd. He said the ATC administrative judge issued order for handing over of accused's custody for military trials. The ATC declared the accused guilty before completion of the investigation. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that the use of words in the verdict of Anti-Terrorism Courts Lahore and Islamabad was identical. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel added it seems the judges of Anti-Terrorism Courts were weak in English. Faisal Siddiqui said the court can hand over the custody of the accused to military but not the administrative judge. The military can take over the custody of military officials involved in murder and other crimes from civil court under Army Act Section 59 (1). Later, the court adjourned the hearing till Monday.
