Legal & Judicial System in Pakistan Army

1. Legal Framework

The Pakistan Army’s legal structure is primarily based on the Pakistan Army Act, 1952, the Pakistan Army Rules, 1954, and the Manual of Pakistan Military Law, subject to relevant provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan where applicable. In 2023 and 2024, two major amendment packages were enacted:

Pakistan Army (Amendment) Act, 2023: Introduced a ban on political engagement—any serving or retired military officer cannot participate in political activities (e.g., campaigning, holding office) for two (02) years post-service, under penalty of court-martial if violated.

Pakistan Army (Amendment) Act, 2024: Brought three key changes:

• Changed Section 8A to increase the initial tenure of the Chief of Army Staff (COAS) from three (03) to five (05) years.
• Updated Section 8B to allow reappointment or extension of the COAS tenure up to an additional five (05) years (instead of three).
• Added Section 8C to clarify that the retirement age/service limits in Rules do not apply to COAS during his tenure, subject to a maximum age of sixty-four (64) years.

2. Military Courts

The Pakistan Army maintains three tiers of courts-martial, each with distinct jurisdiction:

• General Court Martial (GCM): The highest military court, capable of trying any rank for serious offenses (e.g., treason, espionage, murder).
• District Court Martial (DCM): Handles moderate‐level offenses, primarily for junior commissioned officers and enlisted personnel.
• Summary Court Martial (SCM): Convened by a commanding officer for minor infractions (e.g., insubordination, minor dereliction of duty).

All courts-martial follow a structured procedure:

1. Formal charge sheet under relevant Army Act provisions.
2. Right to legal defense by Judge Advocate General (JAG) officers.
3. Presentation of evidence and witness testimony (prosecution and defense).
4. Written findings and sentencing; subsequent review by higher military authorities (often COAS or an Appeals Court).

3. Judge Advocate General (JAG) Branch

The JAG Branch comprises commissioned officers who are also credentialed lawyers. Their key roles include:

• Providing legal advice to commanders on interpretation of the Army Act and related Rules.
• Prosecuting or defending cases during courts-martial.
• Drafting and updating military legal manuals, ensuring alignment with international obligations (e.g., Geneva Conventions).
• Conducting legal education workshops on evolving jurisprudence (e.g., digital evidence, cyber operations).

4. Appeals and Review

Verdicts and sentences from courts-martial can be challenged through multiple layers:

1. Army Court of Appeal: Comprised of senior officers and JAG judges. It can reexamine procedures, evidence, or legal questions raised in the trial.
2. COAS Review: Under Section 102 of the Army Act, the Chief of Army Staff (or his designate) can confirm, commute, remit, or enhance sentences. This review must be completed within 30 days of conviction.
3. Civilian High Courts & Supreme Court: While military courts are meant to be self-contained, a writ petition can be filed under Article 199 or Article 184(3) of the Constitution if a service member alleges a breach of fundamental rights (e.g., denial of legal representation, arbitrary detention). In May 2025, the International Commission of Jurists noted that Section 2 of the Army Act still allows limited jurisdiction over civilians in certain “defense-related” offenses, which can be reviewed by civilian courts .

5. Special Military Courts

In response to rising terrorist threats, the 21st Constitutional Amendment (2015) established special military courts empowered to try terrorism suspects—both military personnel and civilians—outside the regular court-martial structure. Although initially for a two-year window, successive parliamentary resolutions have extended these courts’ mandate. Their procedures:

• Operated under a distinct set of rules, with limited transparency compared to regular courts-martial.
• Verdicts are generally final, with review by a three-member appellate bench but no further recourse except a presidential reference.
• Subject to continuous debate: human rights groups and opposition parties criticize the opaque processes and restricted appeal options.

6. Discipline and Accountability

The Army’s internal disciplinary regime emphasizes rapid resolution:

• “Swift, certain, transparent” handling of infractions—from minor misconduct to major criminal acts.
• Penalties range: reprimand, fines, rank reduction, dismissal, imprisonment, or capital punishment (for offenses like mutiny or treason).
• Late 2024 JAG seminars prioritized professional conduct, especially regarding accountability for wartime operations, to align with international humanitarian law.

7. Recent Amendments & Implications

2023 Political-Activity Ban: The Pakistan Army (Amendment) Bill, 2023, prohibits any individual subject to the Army Act—serving or retired—from engaging in political activity for two (02) years post-service. Violations are punishable by court-martial. While the government justified it as a measure to “depoliticize” the armed forces, critics argued it infringes freedom of speech and political rights .

2024 Tenure Extensions: Through the Pakistan Army (Amendment) Act, 2024:

• COAS initial tenure increased from three to five years (Section 8A).
• Reappointment/extension allowed for up to five more years (Section 8B), subject to national security needs and Presidential/Prime Ministerial approval.
• Clarified that during COAS tenure, retirement rules do not apply, up to a maximum age of 64 (Section 8C).

8. Civilian Jurisdiction & Human-Rights Concerns

Although the Army Act still permits extremely limited military trials of civilians—especially under Section 2 for “seducing” service members or violating the Official Secrets Act—very few civilians are actually tried by courts-martial. Since 2019, Supreme Court decisions have increasingly clarified that civilian criminal courts should have priority, except in narrow, defined cases. Human rights organizations call for full repeal of Section 59(4) (trial of civilians by military courts), arguing it conflicts with the Constitution’s guarantee of due process (Article 10A).

9. Conclusion

The Pakistan Army’s judicial and legal system remains a specialized, self-contained framework designed to preserve military discipline and readiness. Recent amendments in 2023 and 2024 have updated key provisions—such as prohibiting political engagement by ex-servicemen and extending top leadership tenures—reflecting ongoing efforts to modernize and stabilize the institution. At the same time, debates continue over the balance between military autonomy and civilian oversight, particularly concerning jurisdiction over civilians and safeguarding fundamental rights.