PKPolitics Discuss » Current Issues

Section 16 of the Pakistan Military Law and Manual of Pakistan

(9 posts)
  1. Section 16 of the Pakistan Military Law and Manual of Pakistan:

    This Law was a British Army Law which was adopted by both Pakistan and india after the Partition. This Law gives the Power and Authority to the Chief of Army Staff to fire any Army personnel without giving any reasons. The Chief won't face a court martial despite any irregularity. India changed this law and hence we see, that they have Court martialled Top generals but Pakistan Army kept this section to protect their top brass from any litigation.

    Talking about his arrest, General (retired) Ziauddin said he was kept in custody for two years at the headquarters of the 111 Brigade. He said that he was told by a junior officer that he (Ziauddin) had been removed from service. Later, he added, he was given a hand-written order that he was removed under section 16 of the Pakistan Military Law and Manual of Pakistan Military Law but he was never court martialled.

    According to Ziauddin, the removal orders of any senior officer are to be signed by the prime minister or the president. But his dismissal orders, which were sent to the then president, Rafiq Tarar, were not signed by the latter. Evidently, the dismissal orders must have been backdated and signed by Pervez Musharraf once he took over as president, he conjectured.

    Ziauddin said that Musharraf confiscated his property and deprived him of his retirement benefits. The retired ISI chief today lives in a one-canal house owned by his wife. He claimed that for most of Musharraf’s tenure he lived under strict observation and surveillance and most of his former colleagues avoided meeting him.

    I am not discussing General Ziauddin's role in the military coup but I am quite concerned that our Military has remained a "Holy Cow" despite so rapid changes around the globe. It's time that Pakistan Army change it's ways and become an accessible institution when it comes to corruption and irregularities.

    What do you guys think?

    Posted 1 year ago on 12 Mar 2011 18:37 #
  2. zenith
    Member

    @ Khan saab

    Only a fool would disagree with this.

    You have hit the nail on the head. This is the main reason why there is no accountability because the head of the most powerful institution is not accountable to anyone.

    Please be warned, Zaid hamid fan club might declare a fatwa against this thread.

    Posted 1 year ago on 12 Mar 2011 19:03 #
  3. shirazi
    Member

    Let me try to play devil's advocate.

    I have many issues with Army's interference in political affairs of the country but I applaud one thing when they interfere they do as one unit. It's one disciplined institution. That's why we don't see any junior officer doing a successful coup. Imagine a scenario two armed brigades up against each other. Touch wood, all our coups were peaceful so far. Imagine a situation in '99 one brigade wanted military intervention and other didn't. Then Musharaaf and Ziaudin Butt's loyalists 'd be shooting each other down. And kind of weapons they have it won't be just target killings like Karachi. It 'd be perhaps 10 times worse than what we are seeing in Karachi.

    If this law, section 16, helps Army to maintain much needed discipline we can swallow it as bitter pill.

    Posted 1 year ago on 12 Mar 2011 20:12 #
  4. zenith
    Member

    @ shirazi

    Don't you think that this could serve as a deterrent?

    If the army chief knows that his actions will be considered unlawful and any junior officer who goes against it will have law on his side, the army chief would think twice before going ahead with adventurism.

    This is the reason why bureaucracy and army never go against the corrupt status quo.

    Listen to what many retired generals have said that they have to obey their senior because they know that even the law will not protect them.

    So, this is a weak argument.

    Posted 1 year ago on 12 Mar 2011 23:05 #
  5. @Zenith & Shirazi,

    Why do we think that we will have coup if we abolish this law. How many coup we have witness around the globe among army? Not many...

    And is it justified to keep this black law for the fear of a clash between 2 Generals? Why this law has been abolished in indian army code but not by pakistan Army? We didn't see any coup in indian army due to absence of this law.

    As Zenith also put it, I think the fear of accountability will actually stop them from any illegal act or dismissal of a junior for the sake of their own ulterior motives.

    Posted 1 year ago on 12 Mar 2011 23:15 #
  6. shirazi
    Member

    @Zenith & Khan Sb.

    Well there is a law article 6 in the constitution to deter Generals but time and again it is proved it's not enough. I agree article 16 of penal code won't make a big difference either way. We are just fortunate so far none of the coups from junior officer succeeded but their is no law that can assure it 'd never happen. So this law perhaps should be abolished.

    Posted 1 year ago on 13 Mar 2011 0:00 #
  7. @Shirazi..

    Actually this law is to protect the Top brass Generals. The Junior officers who ever were involved in any Coup were all fast tracked Court Martialled and Hanged.

    Posted 1 year ago on 13 Mar 2011 0:07 #
  8. zenith
    Member

    @ shirazi and khan sahab

    you seem to miss the finer point. Article 6 will never stop an army general because he knows that as long as his own institution is with him, he fears nothing.

    The biggest fear of any General would be to lose the support of his own armed troops and fellow generals. Once that fear lurks, A General would think twice before committing adventurism.

    Good generals too are cleverly disabled as they cannot take a stand. This applies to all good bureaucrats who can do nothing if they oppose unlawful commands.

    Posted 1 year ago on 13 Mar 2011 0:48 #
  9. zenith
    Member

    Our main emphasis should be on the dissolution of this law which I believe that only an army chief can do it. I guess even Bhutto tried and failed. Strangely, Jinnah never did anything against it. Correct me If am wrong.

    Posted 1 year ago on 13 Mar 2011 0:51 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.