The corps commanders committee in addition to all other uniformed officers who were guarding him each and every time with boots on are equally and fully involved in the acts and deeds of the accused person. The ratio decidendi [rule of law on which a judicial decision is based] of the [2016 Supreme Court] judgement is that the aiders and abettors can’t be inducted by the court in a complaint filed by the federal government, meaning thereby the federal government/complainant is not absolved of not investigating these officers and filing a complaint against them, which they can do at any time. If for a moment it is presumed that military high command, including corps commanders were not involved then why they failed to defend and protect the Constitution by not retraining a man in uniform, but unfortunately the cronies of the accused has been left free till date,” the verdict said.
Meanwhile, the judgement said that Article 6 is the only safeguard within the Constitution that deals with an offender, who challenges or attempts to challenge the boundary of the social contract between citizens and the State. The trial of the high treason is the requirement of the Constitution against all those individuals who undermines or attempts to undermine the Constitution by any means. In his separate note, Justice Shahid Karim also described Article 6 as a bulwark against any creeping coup which may cause a constitutional deviation.On 25th, 1969, again the then head of the army, General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan abrogated the Constitution of 1962 and promulgated martial law followed by Provincial Constitution Order. On 5th July, 1977, once again martial law was imposed by the then army chief, who vide proclamation of martial law, dissolved the National Assembly, the Senate, the provincial assemblies etc. and put the Constitution of 1973 in abeyance followed by laws (Continuation in Force) Order 1977.
ConversionConversion EmoticonEmoticon