Supreme Court upholds establishment of military courts

[karakoram]

Nasirul mulk is a hell ofa guy. Noww tera kya hoga kalia ( all scum bags waiting for departure for hell )

 

[M.SAAD]

Wow, great

 

[VCheng]

you can ask any Pakistani who these people are and what they represent. Their personal agendas of "human rights" can not understand the thousands that have been killed by terrorists and those terrorists who made it to courts were let go based on civilian courts with their terrorism sympathising benches.
The ability to keep a personal level of security and get security deployments from the government has made these experts of useless idiocy feel very secure. Why not take away any government security and leave them to fend for themselves.

Please keep in mind that such people act as a check in the system to keep it in balance, otherwise the whole edifice falls apart. The Supreme Court heard the petition and rendered its verdict. Whether anyone agrees with it or not, the real winner here is due process. Now the work of the Military Courts is above any suggestion of illegality, since due process has been followed. Very important.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Check out her reaction...!!!

View attachment 243998

she seems to be constipated or suffering from age old back pain from piles.

@Irfan Baloch sir ur reaction?

it is good news. hopefully the accused will still get a fair trial and just being a military court wont mean that punishment is a foregone conclusion. otherwise Military wont have brothered with this setup and finished off the suspects in the encounters like the Punjab/ Sindh police does

 

[Leader]

Its a good step, the ordinary courts dont bother to convict, this hopefully will do the job. hang terrorists !

 

[VCheng]

it is good news. hopefully the accused will still get a fair trial and just being a military court wont mean that punishment is a foregone conclusion. otherwise Military wont have brothered with this setup and finished off the suspects in the encounters like the Punjab/ Sindh police does

Due process is extremely important. The Military should never have to resort to extrajudicial killings now that it has access to properly validated courts of its own. The proceedings there must be made public so that everyone can see that they are working correctly as intended in dispensing speedy justice to the terrorists.

 

[salarsikander]

Due process is extremely important. The Military should never have to resort to extrajudicial killings now that it has access to properly validated courts of its own. The proceedings there must be made public so that everyone can see that they are working correctly as intended in dispensing speedy justice to the terrorists.

Hi,

Extra judicial killings can take place if its in the national interest of a countr. every country does that

 

[VCheng]

Hi,

Extra judicial killings can take place if its in the national interest of a countr. every country does that

Within one's own country? Only if there is no Rule of Law.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Due process is extremely important. The Military should never have to resort to extrajudicial killings now that it has access to properly validated courts of its own. The proceedings there must be made public so that everyone can see that they are working correctly as intended in dispensing speedy justice to the terrorists.

absolutely, small and tentative steps towards a justice system that is fair towards those people who make beheading videos and have a hoard of apologists but despite that we need to leave a legacy where we can show that our actions were different and there was no brutal and summary execution in front of a camera to instil fear and terror among people.

 

[VCheng]

absolutely, small and tentative steps towards a justice system that is fair towards those people who make beheading videos and have a hoard of apologists but despite that we need to leave a legacy where we can show that our actions were different and there was no brutal and summary execution in front of a camera to instil fear and terror among people.

I would agree, and add that the validation of military courts by the SC was a huge and important step.

 

[salarsikander]

Within one's own country? Only if there is no Rule of Law.

Hi,

Rule of law is what differs man from animal.

and for that matter in pursuit of national objectives such as national security it is allowed

 

[Irfan Baloch]

I would agree, and add that the validation of military courts by the SC was a huge and important step.

sir
we got a long way to go. we become judge, jury and executioners whenever we see something similar to APS atrocity hence we see a mob and lynching mentality and sometimes there are excesses and innocent people get caught.

I would like to give the example of the trial of Sadam Hussain. despite all the objections to the way it was handled and carried out. at least he was given the choice to represent himself and given a trial unlike untold number of people who were executed on his orders including his own family members.. contrast that with the way Qaddaffi was lynched.

 

[VCheng]

Hi,

Rule of law is what differs man from animal.

and for that matter in pursuit of national objectives such as national security it is allowed

Extrajudicial killings are illegal, plain and simple.

sir
we got a long way to go. we become judge, jury and executioners whenever we see something similar to APS atrocity hence we see a mob and lynching mentality and sometimes there are excesses and innocent people get caught.

I would like to give the example of the trial of Sadam Hussain. despite all the objections to the way it was handled and carried out. at least he was given the choice to represent himself and given a trial unlike untold number of people who were executed on his orders including his own family members.. contrast that with the way Qaddaffi was lynched.

We do indeed have a loooooooong way to go, with my previous response to an example of just how immature popular thinking might be speaking for itself.

 

[salarsikander]

Extrajudicial killings are illegal, plain and simple.

Hi,

and so is attacking a sovereign nation in the pursuit of so called national objectives or forcing anyone into submission.

But then again if its in pursuit national objectives and is ambiguously mention in book of law, who are we ( the People) to oppose the supreme constitution, which is above everything and can be changed by any tom dik or harry

 

[VCheng]

Hi,

and so is attacking a sovereign nation in the pursuit of so called national objectives or forcing anyone into submission.

But then again if its in pursuit national objectives and is ambiguously mention in book of law, who are we ( the People) to oppose the supreme constitution, which is above everything and can be changed by any tom dik or harry

Then why do you think this decision by the SC was needed to validate the military courts?