More than 100 citizens were placed in a sort of legal purgatory after the Supreme Court’s Dec. 13, 2023, order, which suspended the application of an earlier ruling declaring military trials for civilians “illegal” and permitted hearings against the May 9 suspects to proceed.
Until the nation’s top judges decided whether or not military trials for civilians are permissible by law, they were neither to be found guilty nor exonerated. Then, for months, the issue was put on hold.On Monday, the six-member Supreme Court bench realized—possibly a little too late—that the ruling had also postponed the release of individuals who were supposed to receive shorter prison sentences from the military courts and those against whom there was insufficient evidence.
This Thursday, the SC granted the military courts permission to issue reserved verdicts in these particular cases as a “remedy,” thereby enabling the release of the designated suspects ahead of Eid. According to reports, the order would help 15 to 20 people, subject to the army chief’s approval, of course.But, since the outcome of the appeals against the SC’s military court verdict will ultimately decide whether or not any of these trials were legally legitimate, the 80 or so civilians who are still in military custody will have to wait.
It is important to remember that the SC decided in October of last year that all May 9 suspects should face criminal trials rather than military ones and that military courts had no jurisdiction to prosecute civilians for rioting. A retrial in a criminal court may be required for all suspects, including those who are about to be released, if the six-member bench of the supreme court hearing the appeals against this ruling upholds it.This was something that the judges who postponed the Supreme Court’s October decision should have taken into consideration. They ought to have realized that they were extending the suspects’ legal battle and proceeded to pursue the appeals with greater urgency as a result. They have now permitted the military courts to render decisions without considering the legality of the trials themselves.
We must put an end to this issue. The suspects will not be given back the time they have already spent in custody. The presumption of innocence doctrine ensures that no one is punished for a crime until it has been established beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.It is deeply regrettable that the Supreme Court brought about this predicament, permitting the government to persist in denying citizens their constitutional rights in the absence of any convictions. As some observers have noted, it appears that the legal system’s procedure serves as the penalty. We shouldn’t permit this to go on.
