3 min read
The European Union (EU) has expressed concern over the recent convictions of 25 civilians by Pakistan’s military courts, warning that the sentences could jeopardize Pakistan’s GSP+ trade benefits. The individuals were condemned for their role in the May 9 riots, with jail sentences ranging from two to ten years. The EU contends that these penalties breach Pakistan’s commitments under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
A statement issued by the European External Action Service (EEAS) emphasized that the military court’s handling of these cases was inconsistent with Pakistan’s commitments to ensuring a “fair and public” trial for all individuals, as outlined in the ICCPR.
Article 14 of the ICCPR ensures that every individual is entitled to a fair and public hearing conducted by a court that is independent, impartial, and competent, as well as the right to receive adequate and effective legal representation. Furthermore, the piece asserts that decisions in criminal matters should be accessible to the public.
The statement from the EU highlighted that Pakistan must adhere to 27 international conventions, including the ICCPR, as part of the European Union’s Generalized Scheme of Preferences (GSP+) to maintain its preferential trade access to the EU market.
The GSP+ status offers considerable trade benefits for Pakistan, granting duty-free entry to the EU market for a variety of its exports, such as textiles, garments, and surgical products. However, this designation hinges on Pakistan demonstrating significant advancements in human rights, governance, and environmental stewardship, all of which are encompassed within the 27 fundamental conventions.
The military stood by the verdicts, emphasizing that the sentences were issued after a comprehensive examination of the evidence and adherence to legal protocols. It was stated that the individuals found guilty were afforded their legal rights throughout the trial process.
Legal Community’s Concerns
The legal community has raised concerns over the implications of Pakistan’s non-compliance with international legal obligations, particularly regarding the military courts’ decisions to sentence civilians.
Former additional attorney general Tariq Mahmood Khokhar asserted that the rule of law mandates state compliance with both national and international laws. He highlighted that Pakistan is a signatory to the ICCPR, whose Article 14 guarantees the right to a “fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal.”
Khokhar emphasised that the convictions and sentences handed down to 25 civilians by military courts violate Pakistan’s commitments under both international and national law. He warned that non-compliance with Article 14 and insufficient governance might result in the suspension of Pakistan’s GSP+ status, which could subsequently lead to a ban on exports to the EU.
Faisal Siddiqi, who represented civil society members in the military courts case, described the convictions as a “tragic reminder of the dark days of the usurper and former military dictator General Ziaul Haq.” He stated that the sentences violated the assurances made by the Attorney General of Pakistan to the Supreme Court that no lengthier sentences would be imposed. Siddiqi underscored that these types of infractions fall under the category of contempt of court.
The EU’s apprehensions underscore the persistent discrepancy between Pakistan’s international obligations and its legal practices, particularly in relation to the treatment of civilians and compliance with human rights standards.
