Col Inam files affidavit in detention case.

Byline: Nasir Iqbal

ISLAMABAD -- Just a day before the hearing of federal government's appeal against the Lahore High Court ruling that declared retired Lt Col Inam-ul-Rahiem's detention unlawful, the ex-army officer moved an affidavit before the Supreme Court, stating that the authorities can arrest a civilian under the Official Secret Act 1923 only if he is within the vicinity of a prohibited place.

The deponent said it was an admitted fact that he was forcibly taken away on Dec 17 last year from his residence, situated in a colony of retired officers outside Rawalpindi Cantonment, and not from any duly notified prohibited place.

The action was against the provisions of Section 12 of the Official Secret Act 1923, he stated in the affidavit, adding that neither his mobile phone nor any laptop or computer was ever taken away by the intruders from his home.

On Wednesday, a two-judge SC bench, headed by Justice Mushir Alam, will take up the federal government's appeal against the LHC Rawalpindi bench's order on the habeas corpus petition of Husnain Inam, son of the retired colonel.

At a previous hearing, the apex court had asked the federal government to assist it in understanding whether civilians could be tried under the Pakistan Army Act, 1952 by the Field General Court Martial and whether the fundamental rights as enshrined in Part II of Constitution's Chapter I could be denied to a person even if he was not a member of the armed forces simply because he was made subject of the Army Act, 1952.

A notice had also been issued to Attorney General Khalid Jawed Khan to assist the apex court in understanding the difference between the languages used in Article 8(3) and Article 199(3) of the Constitution.

Article 8(3) says that any law inconsistent with or in derogation of fundamental rights will be considered void, but this provision will not apply to any law relating to members of the armed forces or of the police or any other forces charged with the maintenance of public order, for the purpose of ensuring proper discharge of their duties or the maintenance of discipline among them.

Article 199(3) empowers the high court to extend its jurisdiction if it is satisfied that no other adequate remedy is provided by law, but says an order shall not be made under clause 1 on application made by or in relation to a person who is a member of the Armed Forces of Pakistan, or who is for the time being subject to any law relating to any of those Forces, in...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT