Author -Vaishali Tomar, a 4th year student at Faculty of Law, AMU, Aligarh
Abstract:
This article explores the evolving role and impact of Armed Forces Tribunals (AFTs) within the Military Justice System in modern times. It provides a comprehensive analysis of how AFTs function as specialized judicial bodies, ensuring the fair trial and rights of military personnel while balancing the unique demands of military discipline and national security. It examines key legal principles governing AFTs, including jurisdictional challenges, procedural safeguards, and the interplay between military and civilian legal frameworks.
Keywords: Military Justice System, Armed Forces Tribunals, Constitutional Law, Military Discipline, justice, Human rights.
Introduction
Within the domains of justice and military matters, the Armed Forces Tribunal serves as a powerful entity, maintaining equilibrium between discipline and impartiality. The Armed Forces Tribunal, a cornerstone in military justice, holds a crucial role in resolving disputes and issues concerning the armed forces.
Tribunals are specialized judicial bodies or forums, operating to resolve specific types of disputes or administer justice in particular areas of law. Armed Forces Tribunals (AFTs) serves as specialized quasi-judicial bodies to address legal matters pertaining to the armed forces. The Armed Forces Tribunal in India, formed on August 8, 2009, operates as a statutory body according to the Armed Forces Tribunal Act of 2007, under the oversight of the Ministry of Defence. Tasked with addressing military-related conflicts, the AFT deals with service issues and appeals arising from Court-Martial verdicts, aiming to deliver prompt justice to members of the Armed Forces.
Objectives
AFTs are designed to provide a forum for armed forces personnel, including serving and retired members, to seek justice in cases related to service matters, disciplinary actions, and other issues specific to the military environment. The tribunals function independently of the regular court system, allowing for a focused and nuanced approach to military legal issues.
Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007
On August 8, 2009, the President of India inaugurated the Armed Forces Tribunal, established through the enactment of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 by the Parliament. The 169th report of the Law Commission in 1999 suggested the need for prompt resolutions in disciplinary and service matters, advocating for the establishment of a dedicated tribunal for military and paramilitary forces.
This Tribunal has been granted authority by the Act to challenge decisions, orders, or sentences issued by a court martial. It has the jurisdiction to render judgments on issues related to commission, appointments, enrolments, and service conditions governed by the Army Act, 1950, The Navy Act, 1957, and the Air Force Act, 1950. Additionally, it enables the tribunal to handle appeals arising from decisions of courts-martial under these acts and related matters.
The Tribunal is comprised of Judicial Members, retired High Court Judges, and Administrative Members, retired armed forces personnel with the rank of Major General.
Apart from the main bench in New Delhi, the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has Regional Benches. Except for Chandigarh and Lucknow, which each have three benches, the other locations house a single bench. Every bench is composed of a Judicial Member, often a retired High Court Judge, and an Administrative Member, typically a retired Armed Forces member holding a rank of Major General or higher for a minimum of three years. Additionally, Judge Advocate Generals (JAG) who have held the position for a minimum of one year can also serve as Administrative Members.
The Tribunal will conduct its proceedings in accordance with the Armed Forces Tribunal (Procedure) rules, 2008, with all proceedings conducted in English. Typically, the Tribunal adheres to the procedural norms followed in the High Courts of India.
Powers of Armed Forces Tribunal
The Tribunal is empowered to wield all authorities specified in this Act to address appeals, orders, or sentences issued by the Court martial. If an individual feels aggrieved, they can appeal to the Armed Forces Tribunal within the stipulated time.
Additionally, the Tribunal holds the authority to grant bail, with or without conditions, to individuals accused of an offense and under military custody.
When the Tribunal determine that a sentence is illegal or unjust, it has the authority to transmit the entire or partial sentence with or without conditions. The Tribunal can also reduce the punishment, mitigate it to a lesser penalty, or increase the sentence imposed by the court martial.
Its principal bench is at New Delhi with regional benches at cities such as Chandigarh, Lucknow, Kolkata, Guwahati, Chennai, Mumbai etc.
Role of Armed Forces Tribunals (AFTs)
Armed Forces Tribunals (AFTs) serve as specialized quasi-judicial bodies with the primary role of adjudicating legal matters related to the armed forces. The key functions and roles of AFTs include:
Adjudication of Service Matters: AFTs handle a wide range of service-related disputes and grievances faced by armed forces personnel. This includes issues such as promotions, postings, transfers, pay, and pension matters.
Disciplinary Proceedings: AFTs play a crucial role in reviewing and deciding cases involving disciplinary actions against military personnel. They ensure that due process is followed and that disciplinary measures are just and fair.
Appeals and Redressal: Individuals within the armed forces, both serving and retired, can approach AFTs to appeal against decisions that affect their service conditions or to seek redressal for grievances. This provides a dedicated avenue for addressing disputes within the military community.
Independence and Impartiality: AFTs operate independently of the regular civil courts, which allows for a more specialized approach to military legal matters. The tribunal members, often including retired military officers, bring a deep understanding of military procedures and culture to the adjudication process.
AFTs hear a range of cases, including service matters (promotions, postings, transfers), pension and promotion disputes, medical and disability claims, pay and allowances, and human rights violations. These cases involve resolving disputes related to military personnel’s service conditions, benefits, and rights, ensuring fairness and adherence to legal and ethical standards within the armed forces.
Who can appeal before the Tribunal?
Individuals dissatisfied with a court martial order, decision, or finding have the option to appeal to the Armed Forces Tribunal. The Tribunal holds the authority to dismiss an appeal if it deems the court martial findings justified or to permit an appeal against conviction. The Tribunal can allow an appeal against conviction. Appeals against the Tribunal’s decisions can only be pursued in the Supreme Court.
Comparative analysis of Armed Forces Tribunals with Civilian Courts and Court Martials
Armed Forces Tribunals (AFTs) offer a specialized platform for adjudicating disputes within the armed forces, distinguishing themselves from civilian courts and court martials. Unlike civilian courts, AFTs possess expertise in military-specific matters, ensuring swift and just resolution of service-related grievances. However, AFTs are limited to disputes arising within the armed forces, while civilian courts have broader jurisdiction.
Additionally, court martials maintain a unique focus on maintaining discipline and order within the military. In essence, AFTs offer a specialized and efficient avenue for resolving disputes within the armed forces, complementing the roles of civilian courts and court martials.
Case Laws
Union of India & Ors Vs. Major General Shri Kant Sharma & Anr
The aggrieved party cannot challenge both the decisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) and the High Court in a single combined appeal.
When the High Court considers a petition, utilizing its authority under specific writs in the Indian Constitution against decisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal concerning appeals against Court martial, it creates a perplexing situation for the aggrieved individual seeking relief from the court.
The High Courts of Andhra Pradesh and Allahabad did not entertain petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in 1949 but instead directed petitioners to pursue remedies under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act. Aggrieved individuals are granted the freedom to seek remedy under Section 30 when appealing to the Supreme Court with leave under Section 31, and, if needed, file a petition.
Colonel A.D. Nargolkar Vs. Union of India & Ors
High Courts have the authority to amend decisions made by the Armed Forces Tribunal to judicial review.
The Supreme Court noted that the Indian Constitution eliminates the sole administrative supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court over the Armed Forces Tribunal under Article 227(4) but doesn’t affect its judicial supervisory jurisdiction over the AFT. The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, affirming the maintainability of orders issued by the Armed Forces Tribunal.
Can the Armed Forces Tribunal be recognized as a proficient dispenser of justice and provider of remedies?
The effectiveness of the Armed Forces Tribunal in delivering justice and providing remedies is a subject of ongoing evaluation. Its success depends on factors such as efficiency in adjudication, accessibility, and the satisfaction of the parties involved.
The establishment of the Armed Forces Tribunal arose from the issue of delays in resolving disputes between armed force members and the force in Civil Courts. However, the desire of service personnel seeking resolution through a Tribunal tailored for them has yet to be fulfilled.
Performance and case disposal by the benches are hampered, as they tend to only hear cases until lunchtime, thus underutilizing judicial timings. Furthermore, litigants lack faith in the Tribunal’s efficiency due to non-implementation of final orders that could have offered relief, among other contributing factors.
It is also said that the effectiveness of the Tribunals is believed to be entirely at the discretion of the government.
Conclusion
Armed Forces Tribunals (AFTs) play a crucial role in ensuring justice and discipline within military framework. Their primary function is to adjudicate disputes and grievances among armed forces personnel, offering a specialized forum for legal matters related to military service. As military dynamics evolve, it remains imperative to refine and adapt these tribunals to meet the changing needs and expectations of a modern armed forces justice system.
Ensuring transparency, fairness, and efficiency in the functioning of Armed Forces Tribunals is essential for fostering trust among personnel and upholding the principles of justice within the military justice system. Overall, the continuous refinement of AFT processes is imperative to meet the dynamic demands of the armed forces while safeguarding the rights and welfare of those who serve.
FAQs
Q1: Who can approach an Armed Forces Tribunal?
A1: Military personnel, including members of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, as well as their dependents, can approach AFTs for resolving service-related disputes. Retired personnel and their families can also seek redress for issues like pension disputes.
Q2: Are the proceedings of Armed Forces Tribunals open to the public?
A2: Proceedings in AFTs are generally not open to the public to maintain confidentiality and protect sensitive military information.
Q3: How is the AFT different from a civilian court?
A3: The AFT is a specialized tribunal with expertise in military law and procedures, whereas civilian courts deal with a broader range of legal issues.
Q4: Can AFT decisions be appealed?
A4: Yes, AFT decisions can be appealed to the Supreme Court or High Courts, depending on the jurisdiction.
Q5: Can civilians be tried in Armed Forces Tribunals?
A5: No, civilians cannot be tried in AFTs. These tribunals are exclusively for service members and military-related issues. Civilian cases fall under the jurisdiction of regular civilian courts.
Sources:
__________________
