Does a consensus around military courts truly exist in Pakistan? The opponents of military courts come from a wide variety of political and ideological backgrounds \u2014 Islamic, liberal-constitutionalist and ethno-nationalist. It is certainly a mainstream position to argue that some constitutional liberties can be dispensed with as luxuries, which are too costly at a time when Pakistan is fighting an existential war for survival of state and democracy. Three issues need to be borne in mind here. Firstly, given the horrific nature of violence perpetrated by religious, sectarian and other terrorist groups in the country, it can become difficult to ensure due process and constitutional liberties at all times \u2014 given the very nature of the many internal security threats. This is as much a product of Pakistan\u2019s current desperate struggle against terrorism as it is of a weak democratic tradition. So, the concerns of those who argue in favour of military courts are very valid.
\nSecondly, it must also be noted that preserving constitutional freedoms from authoritarian excesses must go hand in hand with our war on terrorism. The Army Act Amendment Bill passed by the national assembly seeks to uphold certain rights for suspects, but lawmakers appear to forget that most people tried by military courts are already in military custody in the first place, or \u2018lawfully\u2019 detained under the rubric of \u201cin aid of civil power\u201d \u2014 meaning that that they are beyond the aid of such legal \u2018protections\u2019. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, there must be some clear benchmarks for establishing the effectiveness of military courts in Pakistan\u2019s counter-terror effort. On this, we are still confused, as can be seen from the contradictory statements of objectives and preambles to the bills passed by the parliament. On the one hand, it is stated that military courts proved successful so far in combating terrorism, on the other hand it is argued that \u2018extraordinary\u2019 measures are still required. I t must not be that some abstract notion of an \u2018emergency situation\u2019 becomes a convenient excuse to roll back human rights and constitutional liberties. Also, our lawmakers would do well to remember Benjamin Franklin\u2019s oft-repeated warning: \u201cThose who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Does a consensus around military courts truly exist in Pakistan? The opponents of military courts come from a wide variety of political and ideological backgrounds \u2014 Islamic, liberal-constitutionalist and ethno-nationalist. It is certainly a mainstream position to argue that some constitutional liberties can be dispensed with as luxuries, which are too costly at a time […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-15162","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-editorial"},"yoast_head":"\n