Rajan Gandhi
Pakistan’s ‘Kangaroo’ Military Courts were established by General Zia-ul-Haq soon after he imposed martial law in 1979 under the pretext to clear the old backlog, but in reality, these Courts took good care of those who dared to oppose the military. The terrorist attack on an army school in Peshawar on December 16, 2014 paved the way for the revival of Military Courts. In January 2017, the trial period of military Courts had expired, but in March 2017, Pakistan Parliament once again extended their validity for two more years. The most astonishing fact is that wherever General Sahib sits; it becomes a Court as according to Pakistan Army Act 1952, a military trial can be held at any place, which means that it depends on Generals mood where he wants to put the accused on trial. Military Courts neither allow family nor are the media is allowed to follow the trial as it takes place in one closed room and no details of the trial are divulged before the verdict is pronounced.
Ironically the convicts sentenced by these Courts do not have the right to appeal in Civil Courts and the so-called provision of ‘appeal’ under the Pakistan Army Act is also a sham as it is placed before a body comprising serving army officers who are expected to examine military verdicts confirmed by their own Army Chief. It is not just a case of plea from Caesar to Caesar’s wife but from Caesar to Caesar himself. These Courts comprise serving officers of the military having no inkling of law, legal procedures or international norms. There is no professional and independent prosecution or defence or even examination of evidence. The conviction rate is almost 100 per cent with custodial confessions and all accused magically pleading ‘guilty’. This is contrary to established principles of justice much cherished in democracies, characterised by the rule of law. They militate against the basic norms propounded by the International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights, especially Article 14, which calls for fair and public hearings in a competent, independent and impartial tribunal.
From 3rd March, 2016, our own Kulbhushan Jadhav has been victim of Pakistani Military Kangaroo Court. Jadhav was allegedly arrested in Baluchistan and was accused of being an undercover RAW agent engaged in stoking the Baluch separatist movement aiming to scuttle the high-profile China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and as such was sentenced to death by a Pakistani Military Court on 10th April. Even the consular access sought to Jadhav had been denied. India rightly approached International Court of Justice and got the death sentence stayed for the time being. Prior to this episode ,The International Commission of Jurists, in 2016, had already objected to the failure of the Pakistan Government and military authorities to share information available about where the trials are being conducted, specific charges and also no evidences are made public by these Courts. Further it went on to add that the legal reasoning and evidences on the basis of which the conviction is awarded is also not made public. But who cares and who listens in the rogue country Pakistan with ‘ Kangaroo’ Courts flouting every international law and convention followed universally.
Contrary to flouting of basic internationally accepted laws by Pakistani ‘Kangaroo’ Courts, Indian judicial system has provided every available opportunity to even terrorists like Ajmal Kasab, Yakub Menon , Afzal Guru to mention a few who were not only safeguarded by government appointed lawyers but it also took painstakingly years to conclude their convictions and so much so that Supreme Court of India even listened to last moment plea of the convicted to stay his hanging, that too at midnight . For what so much pain and efforts are put up by Indian judiciary and the answer is just to follow the universally accepted principal, “it’s better to release a guilty person then to punish an innocent”. Recently only one Mohammed Naved, resident of Bhawalpur Pakistan, was arrested in Jammu’s Samrauli area after an attack on BSF convoy in which two troopers and one militant were killed .The case was handed over to NIA which established that he is a LeT militant. He is second prized Pakistani militant to be captured alive after Ajmal Kasab. NIA has duly filed the charge sheet and the trial is held in the Court of Special Judge, NIA (3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu) in camera. During the course of trial advocate of accused terrorist Naved strongly objected to the recording of statements of witnesses in the absence of accused but the learned Judge over ruled the objection on the pretext of identity and security of witnesses. On this, team of advocates approached High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and eventually Bench of State High Court, exhibiting highest level of integrity and unbiased judgment, delivered the order to record the witness statements in presence of accused only thereby safeguarding his rights as accused. This effort of these lawyers clearly depicts their dedication towards their client irrespective of his religion or nationality and judgment itself upholds the transparency and high judicial norms followed in each and every Court of India. Though the accused Naved is illiterate ,having least knowledge of law, facing trial in other country, still efforts of his lawyers made all the Indians proud of the judicial system and norms followed in our country.
Pakistan should take a leaf out of this exemplary judgment on how the rights of even hardened terrorists are to be safeguarded irrespective of their crimes or gravity of situation. No one is above law but it’s also true that every human being has a right to defend himself. Our State’s judiciary has set an exemplary precedent that even hardcore terrorists have certain basic fundamental rights which should be respected at any cost. Law goes by evidences not by emotions, vague accusations or for that matter imagination as is in the case of Kulbhushan Jadhav. Pakistan must graciously admit its mistake and salvage its already tarnished image at international level by these ‘Kangaroo Court’ judgments as they say it’s better to be late than never.
