ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – The recent sentencing of 25 civilians by a Pakistani military tribunal on Monday drew harsh criticism from the United States, which said the process lacked “judicial independence, transparency, and due process guarantees.” I accused him of being there.
“The United States is concerned about the sentencing of Pakistani civilians in military tribunals and urges Pakistani authorities to respect their rights to a fair trial and due process,” State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said on social media. said.
The US statement follows similar concerns expressed by the UK and the European Union, which questioned the use of military tribunals to try civilians.
The European Union was the first to react to the military tribunal’s judgment on December 21, issuing a statement the next day expressing “concerns” over the sentencing, saying the judgment “requires Pakistan to comply with the International Covenant on Civil Administration and Politics”. “It seems to be inconsistent with that obligation,” he added. Rights (ICCPR)”.
The EU also highlighted that Pakistan is a beneficiary under the Generalized System of Preferences Plus (GSP+), which allows Pakistan’s exports to enter the European market duty-free. This reference was widely taken as a subtle warning against a perceived failure to meet international human rights obligations. This condition may be compromised.
So why did Pakistan punish civilians through military courts? How has Islamabad responded to criticism from the US, UK, and EU? What will happen to Pakistan’s relations with the West?
What was the military tribunal about?
The recent military tribunals stem from nationwide riots that followed the arrest of former Prime Minister Imran Khan in Islamabad on May 9 last year.
Supporters of Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party targeted government buildings, monuments and military installations, including the army headquarters in Rawalpindi and a senior military residence in Lahore that was set on fire. It was included.
Although Khan was released within 48 hours following the Supreme Court’s ruling, thousands of PTI workers were arrested for violent acts.
Of these, 105 were referred to military courts. In April, 20 people sentenced to three years or less were released, and 85 remain in custody.
On December 21, the military announced that 25 people had been convicted and at least 14 sentenced to 10 years in prison.
The military defended the case, arguing that the proceedings followed due process and that the legal rights of the defendants were secured.
Last month, the United Nations Human Rights Committee called on the Pakistani government to review its law on military courts and strip them of their jurisdiction over civilians.
How did Pakistan respond to criticism of the verdict?
Earlier in the week, Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded to the EU’s comments. Spokesperson Mumtaz Zahra Baloch said the government was considering the statement but did not believe that Pakistan’s constitution and judicial system (and not foreign corporations) determine domestic political and legal decisions. Showed.
On Tuesday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a more detailed statement, saying that Pakistan’s legal system “guarantees the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms” and that “the international It was argued that this was consistent with human rights law. Rights (ICCPR)”.
“We will continue to work with our international partners, including the European Union, to uphold international human rights law without any discrimination or double standards,” it said in a statement.
What is GSP+ status and what does it have to do with military tribunals?
GSP+ is an EU-run program that provides partner countries with preferential trade access, encouraging them to improve governance standards and focus on sustainable development.
Under the EU’s GSP+, countries granted such status must comply with and “effectively implement” 27 international core treaties, including the ICCPR, in order to continue to benefit from GSP+ status.
The Convention is non-economic in nature and focuses on issues such as human rights, labor rights, the environment, and good governance.
Pakistan is one of the eight countries enjoying GSP+ benefits, chief among them being duty-free access to European markets. Bolivia, Cape Verde, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Uzbekistan are other countries with which the EU has partnered under the GSP+ initiative.
In a statement on Pakistan’s sentencing, the EU said that under the ICCPR, people have the right to a fair and public trial in an independent and impartial tribunal with adequate legal representation.
Pakistan’s government maintains that the country’s constitution allows civilians to be tried in military courts, a practice that remained in place during Prime Minister Imran Khan’s tenure from 2018 to 2022.
However, military tribunals are often criticized for their secrecy and limited transparency. Defendants have the right to legal representation, but these courts lack the public oversight that characterizes civil trials.
Former Minister of State Haroon Sharif warned that Pakistan’s economic interests could be harmed if non-economic commitments are not kept.
“Such agreements are tools for political negotiations. When a country’s politics are divided, it affects economic outcomes and poses serious challenges,” he told Al Jazeera.
Could Pakistan’s exports take a hit?
The PTI sees the military tribunal as part of a broader two-year crackdown on the party after Khan was ousted in a no-confidence vote in parliament in April 2022.
The former prime minister himself was rearrested in August 2023 and remains in prison on dozens of charges, including sedition and terrorism in connection with the May 9 riots. The military denies allegations that it targeted the PTI.
Former Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi also questioned the decision to try civilians in military tribunals, arguing that the trial gave international organizations a basis for criticism.
“The government could have used anti-terrorism courts or other civilian courts to ensure transparency. Military courts are constitutional but inconsistent with fundamental rights,” he told Al Jazeera. Ta.
Former finance minister Miftah Ismail also called military tribunals “outdated” and called on the government to engage diplomatically with the US, UK and EU to explain the basis for using them in the latest trial. Ta.
“GSP+ status is very important as it allows duty-free access to European markets. Losing this status could reduce Pakistan’s exports by 20-30 percent,” he told Al Jazeera.
According to EU statistics for 2023, Pakistan was the largest beneficiary of GSP+, with more than 78% of its exports to Europe (worth 4 billion euros (approximately $4.2 billion)) exempted from duty. Textiles and clothing accounted for 73 percent of these exports.
Sharif, who also served as chairman of the Pakistan Board of Investment (BoI), said the country’s economic managers need to be aware of the fact that EU countries, the UK and the US have significant influence over decisions made by the International Monetary Fund. He said there is. The (IMF) has provided Pakistan with a lifeline of $7 billion in loans.
“This imposes high transaction costs as Pakistan remains isolated by not engaging with the international community and its institutions, and as political strife continues within the country,” he said.
“This country must find ways to reduce the intensity of this volatile political situation, create space for itself with a professional outlook, and collaborate with global institutions. And incompetence can cause market shocks,” Sharif said.
