The Punjab government informed the Lahore High Court (LHC) that a civilian convicted of offences against the state cannot claim fundamental rights, a stance outlined in a detailed report submitted on Monday.
Also read: North Carolina Farmers Inflation: 2026 US Midterm Impact
Legal basis cited by the government
According to the report, the deputy inspector general of police (legal) referenced a 2005 LHC judgment (PLD 2005 LAH 721) that emphasizes loyalty to the state as a citizen’s primary duty. The document also highlighted the Supreme Court’s May 7, 2025 ruling, which upheld military trials while allowing appeals but rejecting constitutional petitions against such proceedings.
Details of the petition and the accused
The petition, filed by Barrister Hassaan Khan Niazi – nephew of PTI founder Imran Khan – challenges his handover to the army and subsequent trial linked to the May 9 riots. The government’s report described Niazi as a convicted prisoner and an absconder, noting that he was not in judicial custody at the time of the alleged handover.
Procedural arguments presented
The report argued that no separate judicial order was required for Niazi’s transfer because he was already serving a sentence handed down by a Field General Court Martial. It further asserted that filing a constitutional petition while an appeal under Section 133-B of the Pakistan Army Act is pending violates the principle that the same legal question cannot be pursued in two forums simultaneously.
Charges and sentencing
Police records show Niazi was named in FIR No. 96/2023 for an alleged attack on Jinnah House, the residence of the Lahore Corps commander. He was arrested in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on August 16, 2023, handed over to the army under Section 76 of the Army Act, and sentenced in December 2024 to ten years’ rigorous imprisonment under the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and the Pakistan Army Act, 1952.
Implications for constitutional law
The government’s submission contended that Articles 199(3) and 8(3) of the Constitution exclude matters relating to armed forces personnel from the jurisdiction of high courts. It asked the LHC to dismiss the petition as lacking merit and maintainability.
FAQ
Can a civilian convicted of offences against the state claim fundamental rights?
According to the Punjab government’s report, such a claim is not permissible under existing legal precedents, including the 2005 LHC judgment and the 2025 Supreme Court ruling.
What legal avenues remain for the petitioner?
The report indicates that the petitioner can pursue an appeal under Section 133-B of the Pakistan Army Act before the army court of appeals, but cannot file a separate constitutional petition in the high court.
Why is the case significant for future civil‑military legal disputes?
The case underscores the judiciary’s deference to military jurisdiction in matters involving the Official Secrets Act and the Army Act, potentially shaping how similar petitions are handled in the future.
Related News
- Iliana Yotova election 57.6% win marks Bulgaria’s peace pledge
- 2026 US Senate midterms: Democrats lead in key battlegrounds
Source: Dawn
Image: Representative image (AI-generated)
