Where should this case have been tried?

The Supreme Court of Pakistan has handed down an interesting decision, reported here. In Gill v. Federation of Pakistan, which is not yet on the court's website, a retired Army officer successfully sued in the Lahore High Court to overturn a 1999 conviction by field general court-martial for concealing assets and submitting a false tax return. The government appealed but the Supreme Court affirmed. According to The Nation, the officer . . .

had pleaded that the FGCM had overstepped its jurisdiction while convicting him for filing false income tax returns as such charges can only be tried by a civilian court.

On 12 January 2009, the LHC became convinced and set aside a 1999 sentence of the FGCM against Lieutenant Colonel (Retd) Munir Ahmed Gill which found him guilty of filing fake income tax returns, including other instances of frauds.

The LHC setting aside the orders of FGCM had ousted the jurisdiction of the FGCM in regard to the charges pertaining to income tax returns.

During the course of instant hearing, Additional Attorney General Sajid Ilyas Bhatti informed the court that the army officials are expected to remain transparent regarding their assets.

He further informed the bench that concealment of assets by an army official is tantamount to dishonesty.

The bench which also comprising Justice Umer Ata Bandial and Justice Ijazul Ahsan observed that there is no mandatory provision for military officials to disclose their assets.

[Chief] Justice [Mian Saqib] Nisar noted that even in misrepresentation of assets, a military official would not qualify for a court martial instead the matter would fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR).

The law officer further submitted that there is an obligation for a military official that he should be truthful and honest in his conduct.

However, Justice Ahsan observed that statements given to an unauthorised institution would not be considered as misconduct.

The bench however observed that a military court has no jurisdiction to remove any official on the basis of non-disclosure of assets.

Following dismissal of government’s appeal, the ex-army official Lieutenant Colonel (Retd) Munir Ahmed Gill shall be entitled to all pensioner benefits as in accordance with the LHC order.

This is not speedy justice by any standard. The offenses were committed over 20 years ago. The High Court had the case for over eight years, and the Supreme Court had it for another nine.

The implications of the jurisdictional ruling are interesting for British-roots military justice systems in which some or all civilian offenses are swept into military jurisdiction by a borrowing statute. E.g., Art. 134(3), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 934(3) ("crimes and offenses not capital"). (In a 1960s case a member of the U.S. Air Force was convicted by a court-martial for violating the Internal Revenue Code.)