Transparency in Action: Pak Army’s Fair Accountability Model Reinforced by the Faiz Hameed Case

The esteemed and long-standing institutional framework of the Pakistan Army encompasses not only its critical operational duties and the fundamental defense of the nation but also incorporates one of the most structured, exacting, and rigorous internal accountability mechanisms found within any organization across the entirety of the country. This system’s fundamental principles are meticulously codified within a comprehensive set of legal instruments, the cornerstone of which is the Pakistan Army Act of 1952. This Act precisely delineates a clear, impartial, and thoroughly transparent court-martial process, a mechanism that is universally applicable to every individual serving the institution—a scope that intentionally stretches from the most junior enlisted soldier all the way up to the highest-ranking general officer, applying the law without any form of distinction based on rank or previous command authority. This entire structure is deliberately engineered to consistently uphold the highest standards of discipline, ensure the firm enforcement of established legal norms, and guarantee that any and all breaches of military law or professional conduct are addressed and adjudicated within a procedure that robustly provides full legal rights and comprehensive due process to the accused.

The operational core of the Pakistan Army’s internal accountability mechanism is firmly rooted in the concept of universal application of military law. Whether an individual holds the status of a commissioned officer or is a member of the enlisted ranks, they are both unequivocally subject to the exact same provisions and requirements stipulated within the foundational Army Act. When serious allegations emerge concerning professional misconduct, involvement in criminal activity, or violations of military discipline, the individuals accused of such infractions are formally tried through the established system of courts martial. These proceedings are not simple administrative actions; rather, they constitute formal judicial trials, meticulously conducted under the protective aegis of the military justice system. Within these formalized settings, precise charges are legally framed, evidence is systematically presented, and the accused is afforded the crucial provision of defense counsel, which crucially includes the explicit right to legal representation and the guarantee of a fair, impartial hearing. Therefore, the system is fundamentally more than purely disciplinary; it intelligently incorporates numerous procedural safeguards that are specifically intended to mirror, where appropriate, the comprehensive protections commonly found within advanced civilian legal jurisdictions, while simultaneously and expertly addressing the specific, non-negotiable requirements necessary for maintaining military discipline, coherence, and essential operational security.

A profoundly compelling and tangible demonstration of the Pakistan Army’s unwavering institutional commitment to truly equal and transparent accountability is underscored by the recent, highly-publicized court-martial proceedings against Lieutenant General (Retired) Faiz Hameed. This figure is notably distinguished, having previously served as the Director-General of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), which is recognized as Pakistan’s premier national intelligence agency. In what has been widely acknowledged and recorded as an unprecedented and exceedingly notable legal action, Hameed was officially taken into military custody in August 2024. This action was a direct consequence of a thorough court of inquiry that had been formally ordered by the Supreme Court of Pakistan to investigate a range of serious allegations connected to the controversial Top City housing project scandal. Following many months of complex legal proceedings and operating entirely within the stringent, structured framework of a Field General Court Martial, he was found guilty on multiple counts of serious misconduct and subsequently received a definitive sentence of fourteen years’ imprisonment. The substantiated charges included engaging in prohibited political activities, documented misuse of official authority and government resources, and egregious violation of the Official Secrets Act in a manner deemed detrimental to the overall safety and the supreme interests of the state. Throughout the entirety of his trial, Mr. Hameed was fully provided with the full rights to defense counsel and was explicitly allowed the comprehensive opportunity to respond to all allegations presented against him—a clear, powerful illustration that even a retired officer of such senior stature could not, and did not, evade legal scrutiny under the consistent application of military law.

This specific, high-profile example carries immense significance because it definitively showcases several vital elements of institutional equality and inherent transparency within the Pakistan Army. Firstly, a former intelligence chief—a position traditionally viewed as arguably one of the most powerful and influential within the national security apparatus—was subjected without reservation to the precise same legal process as any other junior officer once credible and serious allegations were legally brought against him. Secondly, he was charged using clear, pre-existing statutory provisions and afforded a meticulously structured court-martial procedure that ensured fairness. Finally, the final verdict was issued entirely in accordance with firmly established legal norms, including the provision for subsequent appeals, thereby cementing the legitimacy of the process. Such a high-profile conviction indisputably underscores the critical principle that rank, seniority, or previous command authority do not under any circumstances confer immunity from comprehensive accountability under the consistently applied laws of the Pakistan Army. The verdict in the Faiz Hameed case sends a clear message to all terrorists, anarchists, and anti-state elements that the state has adopted a zero-tolerance approach, and all offenders will be dealt with equally under the law.

The Pakistan Army is depicted as enforcing a long-standing, comprehensive system of accountability that applies equally to all ranks, including retired and senior officers. Numerous cases—ranging from charges of sedition and espionage to inciting mutiny, corruption, and misuse of authority—demonstrate that serious breaches of discipline consistently result in formal trials, convictions, and significant penalties. These proceedings follow strict legal procedures under the Army Act, guarantee access to defense counsel, and allow for appeals, ensuring fairness, transparency, and due process. By maintaining clear rules, documented processes, and multiple layers of oversight, the system reinforces discipline across the ranks and highlights the institution’s commitment to the rule of law.

This model stands in contrast to the challenges often associated with civilian legal institutions, where delays, political pressures, and procedural ambiguities can undermine accountability. The military’s approach shows how predictable timelines, strict procedural integrity, and an absence of selective enforcement can strengthen public trust and sustain institutional legitimacy. By consistently upholding the principle that no individual is above the law, the Army demonstrates how durable accountability emerges from strong, permanent systems rather than temporary efforts. This example underscores the broader national lesson that transparent, efficient, and impartial justice is achievable when supported by disciplined structures and unwavering institutional commitment.