On Friday, the Rawalpindi Bench of the Lahore High Court barred Pakistan Air Force from commencing action against the three allegedly involved in the Kamra Airbase attack, due to the fact that the PAF lawyer failed to quote the law under which the defence counsel was prevented from entering the premises of the base. Making a statement before the Rawalpindi Bench, defence counsel Colonel (r) Inam-ur-Raheem said that he appeared before the military court in order to defend the accused and also sought an inquiry report. However, an hour later he was told that he could not enter the base to represent the accused.
According Mr Raheem, Mirza Waseem Iqbal, senior aircraftman/supply assistant Shawaiz Khan and radar fitter Zafar Abbas had nothing to do with the security of the aircraft, and so the allegations of negligence placed on them were ill-founded. The veracity of the claims made against the three accused in the Kamra Airbase attack is an issue that should be analyzed by the court so that any discrepancy in the verdict can be removed.
In the case that the three are proven to be guilty of not only negligence but potential involvement, the military will have the chance to apprehend those who play a role of duplicity in the ranks. By holding them responsible and accountable for their actions, further double play can also be nipped in the bud. This opportunity to court martial the three allegedly involved can boost public confidence in the legal and military structures of Pakistan. Existing lacunae in the system can be tackled and efficiently addressed by taking the allegation seriously. Given the fragility of the incident, any kind of error in the court process not only undermines the seriousness of the attack, but also leaves gaping holes for potential trouble. Try the accused, but leave no room for doubt in the absolute correctness of the legal process. It is the only way to ensure the verdict handed down will not be received with suspicion or skepticism.