The fate of the punishments awarded by the military courts became uncertain with the edict of the apex court to suspend their implementation, imparting another twist to the concern and controversy raised over their creation. The steps to institute these courts to try the terrorists already seemed to have torn the hearts and minds of the enthusiasts and crusaders for democratic ideals and traditions. Icons like Aitzaz Ahsan and Raza Rabbani from the PPP, the party most prominent for its struggle, sufferings and sacrifices for paving the path for a civilian system, were reported as being particularly perturbed, finding it almost impossible to restrain the tears in their eyes. The lacerating memories of the devotees of democracy being dragged to the dreaded military courts during Zia’s dictatorship to face draconian punishments like being flogged in public, driven to dark dungeons and death must have once again hurt their hearts. Most other parliamentarians, leading legal lights and jurists similarly had their reservations about the compatibility of military courts with the constitution and confessed to have swallowed them with a heavy heart as an inescapable irony wrought by special circumstances. The inevitable recourse to a swift retribution and deterrent was evidently necessitated by the horrors and the havoc wrought by the terrorists who were once so enthusiastically bred and bolstered as our “prime national asset” for some myopic strategic phantoms. Yet they turned to trample us and their bombs and bullets splattered blood across our streets for over a decade. But the justice by the civil courts against the perpetrators unfortunately was too painfully slow, sparse and swamped by legal wrangles and rigmarole to stem their terror tide or bring some consolation to the aggrieved and the sufferers. The lack of judicial thrust against terrorism had been painfully perplexing and perturbing. The superior judiciary, despite being reincarnated through sacrifices for an idealistic and stellar judicial organ, unfortunately became more focused against a selected set of elected representatives. Its milestones were marked more by its activism in hounding and ousting the elected premiers and arraigning the president rather than by its traction to trample terror or streamline its subsidiary strands to ensure efficient, apt and affordable justice. The entire dilemma, diatribe, doubts and dissensions about the military courts evidently could have been averted if the honourable Supreme Court (SC) had stepped up in time, intervening to guide the government to establish special, speedier civilian courts to proceed against the terrorists, constitute special panels of superior judges to supervise their progress and settle any appeals within a short, stipulated span. Still there had been some serious problems stalking such courts. The possibility of threats and intimidation by the intricate, impenetrable and extensive network of terrorists to judges and prosecutors, and lack of real adequate safety measures could be evidently quite daunting. Seating the judges behind special bulletproof screens in highly secured premises could perhaps be an added precaution. The screens could be specifically designed to allow the judges to see the accused, prosecution and defence teams. The identity of the judges could likewise also be protected by fictitious names or numerical codes. Remote video linked courts mimicking the hearing in the Mansoor Memo case, concocted to nail an elected president, could similarly work against the terrorists detained at tightly secured distant locations. But given the spate of corruption and indiscretion in our society, the identity of some judges steering these operations was likely to be leaked at some lower auxiliary tiers. This could have unavoidably raised the risks to our august judicial cadres. Realising this grave predicament, our mighty generals and officers, who had already earned exceptional accolades and salutation for their valour and verve to stake their lives in fighting the terror in the fields also proffered to serve on the proposed military courts to fill the void long felt by the intricacies of the existing judicial edifice. The entire outcome of this elaborate venture, however, now awaits the veritable wisdom and word of our most venerated SC, which must not be surmised or speculated. Still, pending its verdict, a viable alternative proposal to create a special cadre of faster and vibrant robot judges may be mooted for likely consideration. This course could assume even more urgent significance if the SC scrubs the military courts or parliament proceeds to amend their scope, functioning and jurisdiction. Robots being inanimate mechanical devices would be inherently immune to most of the problems and perils endured by human judges and their families. Freed from any fear, favour, sympathy, prejudice, personal interests, gains, ambitions or any other feelings, they would also be strictly impartial like the most idolised judges. A sharp, smart and crisp intelligence to grasp, process and analyse actual crime scenes, including the arguments of the prosecutors and the defence teams, in a lucid and transparent manner can be meticulously embedded in them. The prosecution and defence teams as well as any other observers can instantly view and verify the data entered to their entire satisfaction. Pressing some specified buttons can then actuate them to critically examine and process the entire record, and pronounce and print out the appropriate verdict. Their court sessions evidently can also be continuously conducted ignoring the vagaries of workload, weather, fatigue or burnouts. Fresh teams of expert operators can take shifts irrespective of the time constraints. They would also be quite economical involving no salaries, transport and allied expenditure.Robots designed with perfect precision, reliability and output have already been functioning in various fields ranging from welding to hospitality and surgical operations in the advanced countries. Their role as judges, however, still has not been exploited. Pakistan, being a special country, mired in special circumstances, could thus become the first country in the world to wield this honour. The US accordingly may be approached to supply a string of such custom-made mechanical judges. Some other designers like Germany or Japan, of course, can also be contacted if the US brand seems to rile our anti-US posture. These robot lords would also relieve the army officers of the additional responsibility of rendering judicial services, enabling them to concentrate exclusively on combat and counter-terrorism strategies. This would even satisfy some observations of the august court about overburdening our army officers and defuse the controversy about the military courts. There can thus be a suave, swifter and transparent justice system ensuring a new, marvelous pre-eminence for Pakistan for pioneering an unprecedented, futuristic judicial genre. The writer is an academic and freelance columnist. He can be contacted at habibpbu@yahoo.com