NLC Case: Maj Gen dismissed

[third eye]

By November 2010, Army commenced a Court of Inquiry that was followed by recording of Summary of Evidence in September 2011. However, decision remained pended as some additional documentary evidences were provided by the retired General Officers, which needed scrutiny and time to establish their veracity.

Were these Generals tried by the Military after they retired ?

@Icarus

 

[Jango]

Were these Generals tried by the Military after they retired ?

@Icarus

The Generals were reinstated for purpose of inquiry in 2012 I think, in Kayani's tenure.

 

[third eye]

The Generals were reinstated for purpose of inquiry in 2012 I think, in Kayani's tenure.

Thanks

However,once an employee retires ( superannuates) he is past the age to serve in the Govt. I am curious , is there a law that can re employ an officer after he superannuates for the purpose of trying him under the Army Act ?

If so , wouldn't it be a violation of his rights ? Technically, the case should go to a civilian court.

My views

 

[Jango]

Thanks

However,once an employee retires ( superannuates) he is past the age to serve in the Govt. I am curious , is there a law that can re employ an officer after he superannuates for the purpose of trying him under the Army Act ?

If so , wouldn't it be a violation of his rights ? Technically, the case should go to a civilian court.

My views

THis issue was brought up when they were reinstated.

But the opinion at that time was that since the crime was committed during his serving period, and the case was pertaining to military institutions...they should be tried under Army act.

Have a read:

Section 92
This Section of PAA deals with what if a person who is no more in uniform had committed a crime while he was in uniform.

The fact remains that the crime was committed while the person was part of the military and hence the military has the right to try him under its own rules/laws, which infact are stricter than its civilian counterparts. And thus PAA 92 (that is to say a Law that draws its powers from country’s Constitution) says that if a person who is no more part of the military (retired, released, dismissed, removed or discharged from service) has committed an offence while he was in uniform may be taken into and kept in military custody and tried and punished as if he was still in uniform.

Xeric's Primer: NLC Scam - Dear Civilians, You are Doing it Wrong

 

[third eye]

THis issue was brought up when they were reinstated.

But the opinion at that time was that since the crime was committed during his serving period, and the case was pertaining to military institutions...they should be tried under Army act.

Have a read:

Thank you

Is this a part of the Army Act ?

 

[Jango]

Thank you

Is this a part of the Army Act ?

Yes it is according to the blog by @Xeric

 

[third eye]

Yes it is according to the blog by @Xeric

Thank you..

Maybe @Xeric would like to comment on this.

 

[Jungibaaz]

Because the military is cultivated from the same weed infested garden the rest of Pakistan is. Until the seeds are fixed.. or rather the greenhouse.. there is only so much good it can achieve.

This is true, but the signs within the army look slightly better now. If there is to be some real change in Pakistan, from the civil society up, it will first be seen within the ranks of the army itself. Any major change that is.

 

[Winchester]

This is true, but the signs within the army look slightly better now

This cancer of corruption is well spread even in the Army especially after the Musharraf years.

Just one tenure of Raheel Shareef would not be enough....there is now much more interaction between the army and the society at large in general day-to-day matters as compared to earlier hence you may find the same diseases creeping in.

The only solution is if the country as a whole changes otherwise this three year tenure of Raheel Sharif would just prove to be a temporary reprieve.

 

[salarsikander]

An great step indeed, important to establish accountability for all. Bravo!

Hi,

Sir see the fear of Jernail and their power is not big as it seems

 

[VCheng]

Hi,

Sir see the fear of Jernail and their power is not big as it seems

It is not the power of the Jurnails that is the problem, it is their lawlessness and impunity that causes the problems for the nation. They must have authority to do their jobs, but no more than that.

 

[salarsikander]

It is not the power of the Jurnails that is the problem, it is their lawlessness and impunity that causes the problems for the nation. They must have authority to do their jobs, but no more than that.

Hi,

Gertnails gernail its always gernails

 

[Xeric]

Thank you..

Maybe @Xeric would like to comment on this.

My dear, the Army Act, which BTW is followed in Indian Army as the Act is nothing but the chappa of pre-partition British Military Act, is absolutely clear that a serviceman can be reinstated for the purpose of trial if the act was committed during his duty days.

That's the 'perk' you have when you serve a military.

Just to explain further, answer me this:
Let's say Mr A was an employee of a private company, like let's say Pepsi. Mr A screwed Pepsi while he was there, and now he is retired. Later, Pepsi finds out that he had fucked them in the past, now what would Pepsi do? Would spare him because he has retired? No! It will take him to a civilian court and get him to pay back! That's because Pepsi itself dont have the right or powers to try him. So, where does the 'rights' of Mr A stand if he is still tried in a civilian court after retirement?

But as military of every country has sanctioned powers by their respective governments to try their men according to their (comparatively stricter) laws, so when it revealed that someone who did wrong has retired, the military can always get him back if the case warrants so. Stopping pensions, cancelling post-retirement Rank and Stature privileges like plots, land, military decorations is another way of doing it if the crime is a non-serious type. In this case, would you still say that as the culprit had retired and if the military still cancels his post-retirement privileges, it again is against the culprit's rights?

Reinstating them is exactly the same thing, just the next level of punishment as the crime was a serious one.

Reinstating him is also necessary that unlike a civilian court, military cannot send in the police to make an ex-soldier appear in a (military) court. Also, once reinstated, the dude will have to follow military discipline or else he can be further tried for breach of discipline in addition to his original charge.

Conversely, Pepsi cant cancel post retirement privileges because it did not give any, so it can only take the culprit to a civilian court. However, as all militaries give pensions etc, so it can also stop/cancel it, and further if required, can get the dude back and try him.

i hope this clears it up.

If you remember, an ex-Naval Chief of ours was stripped off his rank, matlab he was no more Admiral Retired XYZ, but just Mr XYZ because he was involved in a corruption scandal. When you see it from the military's point of view, it's a huge punishment, and an insult.

So, civvies and military both dont spare anyone who has retired, just that, people have more 'love' for military and that normally this requires 'reinstatement', so the hue and cry is comparatively more.

 

[Gandhi follower]

No prison .. No jail... Only dismissal ???

 

[Jango]

No prison .. No jail... Only dismissal ???

Do you even know what was the allegation against them?