ALMOST a year after suspending an earlier judgement that had ruled out military trials for civilians, the Supreme Court’s constitutional bench has military courts to pronounce their reserved verdicts in cases pertaining to 85 civilians accused of involvement in the . These individuals have in military custody for many months, sans any clarity about their legal status and without being held guilty of a crime. The court’s ‘solution’ to their conundrum has been to repeatedly extend their legal limbo while it continues to mull the legality of military trials. For now, those “who can be accorded concessions in their sentences should be given so and released; suspects who cannot be released should be moved to jails once their sentence has been pronounced”, the chief of the Supreme Court’s constitutional bench has directed. The legality of their punishment will continue to rest on the court’s final decision. This case will now be heard after the winter break. The constitutional bench’s decision highlights differences of opinion between the judges. Just a few days ago, one of the justices had observed that allowing military courts to issue verdicts would be akin to recognising the legality of the trials. However, it appears that the bench stuck to its old formula to somewhat limit the consequences of delaying its decision. The ruling issued on Friday may result in some more prisoners being released after commutation of their sentences, as before Eid-ul-Fitr this year. However, the question remains: was their prolonged detention, their subsequent trial, and their punishments ever legal in the eyes of the law? It is the responsibility of settling this burning question that the judiciary has avoided for a year now and which the constitutional bench has once again put off for a later date. It cannot be avoided forever. As pointed out many times, the suspects held in military custody have been deprived of their liberty for a very long period, for cases whose entire legality remains in question. There remains the possibility that the Supreme Court may eventually decide that civilians cannot be trialled in military courts, as it had . In that case, the deprivation of liberty suffered by these individuals will have been unjust in the eyes of the law. Who will remedy this injustice? It is for this reason that have been pushing for this matter to be settled at the earliest possible and for all suspects to be tried and, if necessary, punished by ordinary courts so that there is closure. However, the benches that have heard the matter have, inexplicably, seemed unable to realise the urgency of the matter. It is most unfortunate that, a year later, it remains undecided.