Islamabad: Supreme Court (SC) constitutional bench has adjourned till Monday hearing of trial of civilians in military courts .

Justice Jamal Mandokhail has remarked matter is seen in the perspective of basic rights and article 10-A. Army act applies to army only . Either basic rights and justice are given to military officers or otherwise, we will keep all this in view.

Satisfy us on the process of trial in military courts. I have been in this field since 34 years but even then I don't consider my self perfect.

The army officer has so much experience and expertise that death sentence is announced

A seven-member constitutional bench, headed by Justice Ameenuddin Khan, is hearing the case regarding the trial of civilians in military courts. The bench includes Justices Jamal Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Musarat Hilali, Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Shahid Bilal Hassan.

Justice Musarrat Hilali remarked the military officer who runs the trial does not announce the decision in the court. The officer who runs trial sends the case to other senior officer who pronounces the judgment. How can an officer who did not hear the case give the verdict.

Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan remarked military courts trial is not like civilian courts. Give any example of military trial.

Justice Jamal Mandokhail remarked there is difference between army act and other law.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked the procedure of court martial has been given.

Justice Hassan Rizvi said there is defence counsel in court martial . There are no judges therein.

Counsel Khawaja Haris said army act is special law and evidence of special law and process of trial is different.

Justice Naeem Afghan said I have been hearing cases against court martial in Balochistan high court. There is facility of hiring lawyer of own choice too in court martial . The trial of military courts is like other general courts too.

Justice Hilali said she wanted to ask a question. 'A plane carrying an Army Chief was instructed to leave the country by turning off the airport lights. In this incident, the lives of all passengers were put in danger.'

Khawaja Haris replied that how could a person who was not on the plane hijack it?

Justice Hilali said there was only a little fuel left in the plane, yet it was put at risk. Khawaja Haris responded that he would not engage in politics. However, later the Supreme Court reviewed it and acknowledged that there was enough fuel left in the plane.

Justice Hilali said because of this one incident, martial law was slapped on the country. Even after the imposition of martial law, the trial was not held in a military court.

Advocate Haris said hijacking is not a crime listed under the Army Act, which is why the trial could not proceed in a military court.

Justice Hilali said another question arises therein If military or warplane is hijacked then trial will run where.

The hearing of intra court appeal against the decision of trial of civilians in military courts was adjourned till Monday.

Counsel for ministry of defence Khawaja Haris will continue his arguments.