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

A US State Department spokeswoman said: “The United States is concerned about the sentencing of Pakistani civilians before a military court and calls on the Pakistani authorities to respect the right to a fair trial and due process.” Matthew Miller said on Xsocial media platform.

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

The European Union was the first to respond to this step December 21 Military Court rulingsIt issued a statement the next day expressing its “concern” about the rulings and adding that the rulings appeared “inconsistent with the obligations undertaken by Pakistan under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”

The EU also highlighted Pakistan’s status as a beneficiary under the Generalized Supplementary Preferences (GSP+) scheme, which allows Pakistani exports to enter European markets duty-free – a signal that was widely seen as a subtle warning of a perceived failure to meet international obligations in The field of human rights. This could jeopardize the situation.

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

What are military trials about?

The recent military trials stem from the nationwide riots that followed the revolution May 9 arrest For 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 were set on fire.

Khan was released within 48 hours after the 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 sentenced to less than three years in prison were released, while 85 of them remain in detention.

On December 21, the military announced the convictions of 25 people, sentencing at least 14 of them to 10 years in prison.

The military defended the proceedings, saying they followed due process and guaranteed the legal rights of the accused.

Last month, the UN Human Rights Committee urged the Pakistani government to review legislation related to military courts and abolish their jurisdiction over civilians.

How did Pakistan respond to criticism of the ruling?

At the beginning of the week, the Pakistani Foreign Ministry responded to the European Union’s comments. Spokesman Mumtaz Zahra Baloch said the government was reviewing the statement, but noted that Pakistan’s constitution and judicial system – not any foreign entity – would determine its domestic political and legal decisions.

On Tuesday, the State Department issued a more detailed statement, insisting that Pakistan’s legal system “ensures the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms” and was consistent with “international human rights law, including the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” Rights (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)”.

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

What is the status of GSP+ and what is its relationship to military courts?

GSP+ is a program run by the European Union to incentivize partner countries to improve governance standards and focus on sustainable development by giving them access to preferential trade.

Under the EU’s GSP+ system, countries granted this status must adhere to and “effectively implement” 27 core international conventions – including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – to continue to benefit from GSP+ status.

The agreements are not economic in nature and focus on issues such as human rights, labor rights, the environment and good governance.

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

In its statement on the ruling in Pakistan, the EU said that under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, people have the right to a fair and public trial before an independent and impartial tribunal, with appropriate legal representation.

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

However, military trials are often criticized for their confidentiality and limited transparency. Although defendants are entitled to legal representation, these courts lack the public scrutiny that characterizes civil trials.

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

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

Could Pakistani exports be harmed?

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

The former prime minister himself 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 army denies allegations of targeting the PTI movement.

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

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

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

“GSP+ status is crucial, 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 Pakistan was the biggest beneficiary of GSP, with more than 78% of its exports to Europe — worth nearly 4 billion euros ($4.2 billion) — entering duty-free. Textiles and clothing accounted for 73% of these exports.

Sharif, who was also chairman of the Pakistan Board of Investment, says the country’s economic managers need to be aware of the fact that EU countries, as well as the UK and the US, exercise significant influence over decisions at the IMF. (International Monetary Fund), which provides Pakistan with a lifeline-A loan worth $7 billion.

“Pakistan is isolating itself by not engaging with the global community and its institutions, and this has a high transaction cost due to our ongoing internal political disagreements,” he said.

“The country must tone down this volatile political landscape, create space for itself with a professional outlook, and find a way to connect with global institutions. Otherwise, inefficiency may lead to market shocks,” Sherif said.