Islamabad, Pakistan – The recent sentencing of 25 civilians by a military court in Pakistan drew sharp criticism from the United States, which accused the proceedings of lacking “judicial independence, transparency, and due process guarantees”.

“The United States is concerned by the sentencing of Pakistani civilians in a military tribunal and calls upon Pakistani authorities to respect the right to a fair trial and due process,” State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said on X on Monday.

This US statement follows similar concerns expressed by the United Kingdom and the European Union (EU), which also questioned the use of military courts to try civilians.

The EU was the first to react to the December 21 military court verdicts, issuing a statement the next day expressing “concern” over the sentencing and adding that the verdicts appear “inconsistent with the obligations Pakistan has undertaken under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” (ICCPR).

The EU also highlighted Pakistan’s beneficiary status under the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+), which allows Pakistani exports to enter European markets duty-free — a reference that was widely seen as a subtle warning that a perceived failure to meet international human rights obligations could jeopardise this status.

Advertisement

So, why has Pakistan punished civilians through military courts, how has Islamabad responded to the criticism from the US, UK and the EU, and what is next — for Pakistan and its relations with the West?

What were the military trials about?

The recent military trials stem from nationwide riots that followed the May 9 arrest of former Prime Minister Imran Khan in Islamabad last year.

Supporters of Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party targeted government buildings, monuments and military installations, including the army headquarters in Rawalpindi and the residence of a senior military official in Lahore, which was set ablaze.

Khan was released within 48 hours following a Supreme Court ruling, but thousands of PTI workers were arrested for the violence. Of these, 105 were referred to military courts. In April this year, 20 people with a sentence of less than three years were released, leaving 85 still in custody.

On December 21, the military announced that 25 people had been convicted, with at least 14 receiving 10-year prison sentences.

The military has defended the proceedings, stating that they followed due process and ensured the legal rights of the accused.

Last month, the United Nations Human Rights Committee urged the Pakistani government to review legislation concerning military courts and revoke their jurisdiction over civilians.

How has Pakistan responded to criticism?

At the start of the week, Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded to the EU’s comments. Spokesperson Mumtaz Zahra Baloch said the government was reviewing the statement, but indicated that Pakistan’s constitution and judicial system — not any foreign entity — would determine its domestic political and legal decisions.

Advertisement

On Tuesday, the Foreign Office issued a more detailed statement, insisting that Pakistan’s legal system “guarantees promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms”, and was consistent with “international human rights law”, including provisions of the ICCPR.

“We will continue to engage with our international partners including the European Union to uphold the international human rights law, without any discrimination and double standards,” the statement said.

What is GSP+ status and what does it have to do with military courts?

GSP+ is a programme run by the EU to incentivise partner nations to improve governance standards and focus on sustainable development by offering them preferential trade access.

Under the EU’s GSP+, countries granted the status must adhere to and “effectively implement” 27 international core conventions – including the ICCPR – to continue benefitting from GSP+ status.

The conventions are non-economic in nature and focus on issues such as human rights, labour rights, environment and good governance.

Pakistan is one of eight countries enjoying GSP+ benefits, the primary among which is duty-free access to European markets. Bolivia, Cape Verde, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Uzbekistan are the other countries the EU partners with under the GSP+ initiative.

In its statement on the Pakistan sentencing, the EU said under the ICCPR, people are entitled to a fair and public trial before an independent and impartial tribunal, with adequate legal representation.

Advertisement

The Pakistani government argues that its constitution allows civilians to be tried in military courts, a practice upheld even during Khan’s tenure as prime minister between 2018 and 2022.

Military trials, however, are often criticised for their secrecy and limited transparency. Although defendants are entitled to legal representation, these courts lack the public scrutiny characteristic of civilian trials.

Haroon Sharif, a former minister of state, warns that failure to uphold non-economic commitments could harm Pakistan’s economic interests.

“Such agreements are tools for political bargaining. When a country’s politics is fragmented, it impacts economic outcomes and creates serious challenges,” he told Al Jazeera.

Could Pakistan’s exports take a hit?

The PTI considers the military trials part of a broader, two-year crackdown against the party after Khan was ousted via a parliamentary no-confidence vote in April 2022.

The PTI leader was rearrested in August 2023 and remains jailed on charges including sedition and terrorism linked to the May 9 riots, among dozens of other cases against him. The military denies allegations of targeting the PTI.

Former Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi also questioned the decision to try civilians in military courts, arguing that the trials provided international bodies with grounds for criticism.

“The government could have used anti-terrorism or other civilian courts, ensuring transparency. Military trials, while constitutional, conflict with fundamental rights,” he told Al Jazeera.

Advertisement

Former Finance Minister Miftah Ismail also described military trials as “archaic” and urged the government to diplomatically engage with the US, UK and the EU to explain the rationale for this use in this case.

“The GSP+ status is critical, as it allows duty-free access to European markets. Losing this status could reduce Pakistan’s exports by 20 to 30 percent,” he told Al Jazeera.

In 2023, EU figures showed that Pakistan was the largest GSP+ beneficiary, with more than 78 percent of its exports to Europe – valued at nearly 4 billion euros ($4.2bn) – entering duty-free. Textiles and clothing accounted for 73 percent of these exports.

Sharif, who was also the chairperson of Pakistan’s Board of Investment (BoI), says the country’s economic managers need to be cognisant of the fact that EU countries, as well as the UK and the US, wield major influence over decisions at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which is providing Pakistan with a lifeline – $7bn loan.

“Pakistan is isolating itself by not engaging with the global community and their institutions, and this has a heavy transactional cost due to our ongoing domestic political wrangling,” he said.

“The country must reduce the intensity of this volatile political landscape and must create space for itself with a professional outlook, and find a way to plug into global institutions. Otherwise, incompetence might lead to market shocks,” Sharif said.