In the aftermath of the Peshawar High Court’s (PHC) decision to stay the death sentence handed out to Haider Ali by a military court on the grounds of him being a juvenile when he was arrested, the federal government has been jolted into acknowledging the potential of procedural flaws in the operation of the military courts. In line with the PHC decision, the Interior Ministry has sent back ten cases for review to the apex committee of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, which recommends cases for trial by military courts, because of doubts about the age of the suspects. The sending back of the cases is a precautionary measure, with the government keen to avoid embarrassing litigation after a decision has been made and risk aggravating the crisis of credibility at the heart of the whole military courts affair. However, this decision has been met with disdain by military circles, who feel that the juveniles in these cases are hardcore terrorists who have attacked military posts or would have carried out suicide attacks, and if they are referred to the civilian courts they will walk free. Thus in flagrant violation of both international and Pakistani law, there is a demand that by further amending the Pakistan Army Act (PAA), juveniles be put on trial in military courts and potentially face execution. Much has been written about the secretive and dubious process of the military courts, and there have been challenges to their legality. However, the argument of ‘necessity’ and a broken judicial system won out, with the speediness and unhindered nature of military courts appealing to both the public and the political class. But even if one is resigned to the legality of the military courts, the obsession with hurrying through cases and expediting the executions of suspected terrorists with zeal must be checked. In our collective desire to eliminate terrorism we must not lose our heads because the purpose of justice is not to exact revenge but protect the fundamental ideals and principles of society. So even if it is proved that juveniles were responsible for the terrorist activities they are accused of, putting them on trial as adults is a ghastly prospect. The spirit of the law dictates that underage people cannot be held accountable for their actions in the same way that adults are, and this principle cannot be stretched even in the case of terrorism. By the military’s own admission, the juveniles involved in terrorism are brainwashed by their terrorist handlers using a multiplicity of psychological methods and drugs. This makes it even more imperative that they be treated not as accountable perpetrators but as manipulated young minds who are victims themselves. Rather than clamouring to end their lives, the focus should be on reforming and rehabilitating them. The fight against terrorism cannot be won by racking up the body count but by changing mindsets. *