Daily Times

Sir: The establishment of military courts in the wake of the deadliest terrorist attack in Peshawar has ignited heated debate both in the print and electronic media. The advocates of military courts voted in favour, pleading that this system was necessary to speed up the trial of terrorists while the critics argued that military courts will limit the sovereignty of the civilian judicial system. It is also considered that these courts are a mini-martial law in the presence of a democratic government. The considerable fact is that these courts are established for the sake of stability and peace. The idea of these courts does not hinge upon any personal whims or to please any specific group or segment of the political elite. The 21st Amendment has been incorporated in the constitution to try terrorists posing a grave security risk to the country. Since the whole nation has termed the war against terrorism as our own war, in this war the civilian and military leadership are on the same page. Why make a noise about the collaboration of these two regarding the trial of terrorists through military courts? The focus should be on the extermination of non-state actors. It is also important that the investigation process should be fair and transparent so that only terrorists should be tried.

NAZIA JABEEN

Lahore