How not to foster public confidence in the administration of justice

Okay, so Pakistan has been trying civilians in military courts . . . again . . . but this time without the cover of a constitutional amendment. The situation so far, if we understand the state of play: a 3-judge panel of the Supreme Court decides the size of the bench that will hear a case. A 5-judge bench hears the case and, by a 4-1 vote, invalidates the pertinent provision of the Army Act. A 6-judge bench then suspends that decision in the context of a so-called "intra-court appeal," which to American ears sounds like a rehearing en banc. The courts-martial continue in the mean tine. Only then does the 5-judge bench issue its opinions. Now a former Chief Justice of Pakistan is asking that the case be decided by a 7-judge bench. Details here. Oh, and two of the court's justices have resigned.

As Casey Stengel (above) famously asked "Can't anybody here play this game?" Except it's not a game.