There are many factors at play here

A Chinese engineer has been booked on blasphemy charges under the pressure of a mob at Dassu Dam in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Mr Tian, identified in the FIR as merely a heavy transport supervisor, invited the ire of the labour when he reprimanded them for coming late from the payers. According to the FIR, some workers and their interpreters alleged that the Chinese national uttered “sacrilegious remarks” when they sought a break to offer prayers. Since the incident happened in the month of Ramazan when the pace of everyday activities usually gets slow, chances are that the workers would have taken more than usual time to return to work after offering prayers. Mr Tian was taken into police custody apparently to save him from meeting the fate of the Sri Lankan factory manager who was burned to death by a frenzied mob that had accused him of committing blasphemy.

There are many factors at play here. One is religiosity. Second is the absence of the writ of the government. Third is the unproductive labour force. Fourth is the incorrect interpretation of blasphemy. Fifth is the wrong implementation of the blasphemy law.

The basic obligatory tenants of Islam, such as Prayer, Fasting, Hajj, Zakat and Jihad demand different types of efforts and exertions from the practitioners. Of all these obligations, only Namaz is offered daily and five times a day. Metaphorically speaking, the purpose of Namaz is to build the quality of humility and submission in Muslims. However, nowhere Namaz or any other obligation is meant to traumatise its practitioners or others. Therefore, every individual is expected to offer 17 units (rakaat) in a day. No unit takes more than 15 minutes, even if offered with complete concentration. The morning prayers are expected to be extended because that is the time when people are fresh and have no chores on their hands. For other prayers, the length of the prayer is left to the individuals depending on their situation and the time on hand. During the journey, Namaz is halved to facilitate the travellers.

Pakistan is not the only Muslim country where people offer prayers or follow religious obligations. However, it is the only Muslim country, perhaps, where religion is left to the whims of the people. No regulations monitor mosques. No regulations scrutinise the prayer leaders or the clerics teaching in mosques or appointed as Quran teachers at home. In many Muslim countries, clerics are licensed. Mosques follow SOPs for using loudspeakers and conducting seminars. The Friday sermons, one of the most important sermons followed by prayers, are vetted by religious authorities. In Indonesia, mosques are closed after Friday prayers and worshipers are asked to return to their work — as is stipulated in the Quran. The Quran has explicitly laid the responsibility on the state to enforce/administer the system of Namaz. With this obligation, a state is expected to establish regulations and laws to govern the congregations.

Pakistanis for some weird reasons have been wired as the guardians of Islam. This is the result of the fallacies attached to the creation of Pakistan such as: Pakistan was made in the name of Islam; it was a gift from Allah, the proof of which is that it was given to us on the 27th of Ramazan; the Quaid-e-Azam wanted to carve a nation for the Muslims of India so that they could practise their religion without any hurdles; Pakistan is the fortress of Islam — any assault, anywhere on its, finds defenders in Pakistan.

Until 1946 Jinnah was against the partition. He wanted to implement the Cabinet Mission Plan, which offered a federalist system whereby every province would have an independent administrative structure. This three-tier administrative framework would have made the Muslim-majority areas autonomous in their affairs. However, when the Indian National Congress refused to accept the results of the 1946 elections in which Muslim-majority areas had won most of the seats, Jinnah decided to go for partition.

The purpose of building false stories around the creation of Pakistan, along with the deliberate attempt to keep the public education system deprived of sufficient budget and trained human resources while bolstering madrassa education, has been to create a directionless nation subservient to the rule of the power elite. The matter was made worse with the so-called Afghan jihad — a territorial war turned into a jihad, just like the territorial war of Kashmir was. Both wars raised a generation fed on the notion that Hindus, Jews and the Communists were/are the enemies of Islam and, by extension, Pakistan.

The entire history of the misuse of Pakistan’s blasphemy law originates from stripping Ahmadis of their Muslim badge. Without getting into the debate of the authenticity of this step, the argument that bears discussion is: why did the lawmakers leave the blasphemy issue loose-ended? Why could they not see its possible future misuse for gaining political mileage? Why was questioning blasphemy made an act of blasphemy — closing the doors of debate on the issue?

What an irony that the police officers detaining Tian had to show a copy of the FIR against him to a 400 or so mob to assuage their anger. If the Chinese national has committed blasphemy, it is for the relevant authorities to deal with him rather than the mob.

This entire context — where education is thrown downhill, where religion has turned universities into battlegrounds, and where the state has lost the vigour or lack the spirit to combat the tendency to use religion as an instrument to square revenge — has built a nation, which according to the reports of the State Bank of Pakistan, is one of the least productive and most inefficient human resources in Asia. As a result, we have become a country of beggars — from top to bottom.

Hard work, persistence and efficiency have no place in the lives of Pakistanis — shortcuts and theft is our way of life. One of my friends has closed his plastic manufacturing factory in Punjab because he cannot compete with the prices of a Gujranwala-based plastic manufacturer who runs his units on stolen electricity.

Tian has shown us a mirror— that is where the culprit is.

Read more

The Ministry of Law and Justice has recently notified the Anti-Rape (Trial Procedure) Rules 2022 under the Anti-Rape (Investigation and Trial) Act 2021.

A trial starts once the police submit the investigation report (challan) to the prosecution under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Under various provincial legislations (for example, in Sindh the Criminal Prosecution Service (constitution, Functions and Powers) Act 2009 is applicable), the challan is scrutinized and finalized by the special prosecutor, it is then submitted before a magistrate for their approval to take the case to trial. From there onwards, the trial starts in the sessions court designated as a special court under the Anti-Rape Act.

The important point to note is that the rules are applicable only when the trial stage starts. Therefore, the procedure prior to the trial – such as Section 164 CrPC, statements of the survivor and prosecution witnesses, recorded before the magistrate – is not covered under the rules.

No special protection mechanisms are provided to the victims/survivors at the pre-trial stage. This is a gap in the effectiveness of the Anti-Rape Act and Rules as the magistrate courts are not gender friendly and re-victimize the victims/survivors. This is a matter of concern as it has been held by the Supreme Court that a conviction is possible based on the strong solidarity statement of the victim/survivor (2022 SCMR 50 – Supreme Court of Pakistan), (PLD 2021 Supreme Court 550).

Rule 3 is titled ‘Scheduling of trial’. It mandates the issuance of a ‘trial scheduling certificate’ by the judge of the Special Court. This is a good step in the right direction. However, under Section 3(6), the responsibility of confirming availability of witnesses, evidence and expert reports to the special court could be an added burden on the prosecutor’s office. Therefore, appropriate human resources should be provided to the special prosecutors, to implement the rules effectively.

The most common reasons for adjournments in the cases are due to the absence of the complainant and prosecution witnesses. Even if the complainant does confirm their availability, they often move to their villages to avoid appearing in the courts as they often lose out on their daily wages when they have to attend court. Therefore, the rules should have placed a limit on unnecessarily calling the complainant to the hearings. Additionally, the bar associations also need to be consulted (and gender-sensitized) for devising an appropriate strategy to overcome the issue of unnecessary strikes that occasionally disrupt the trial process.

Moreover, many national and international CSOs organize capacity building trainings for special prosecutors and judges in good faith. However, this is problematic because there is no set annual schedule on when the capacity building trainings should take place. In a case of sexual violence, where I am appearing as a counsel for the complainant, first there were adjournments in the case because the special prosecutors were on a two-day training organized by a local CSO. In the next week, there were adjournments because the judge was on a week-long training organized by an international CSO. This causes delays in the trial process.

The adjournments due to trainings are doing more harm than good. The registrar of the high courts and the prosecutor general’s office should initiate consultations and issue an annual schedule for the capacity building trainings. CSOs should not be allowed to engage justice actors for training as per their own schedule (instead their project timelines and targets should be in accordance with the annual schedule issued by the government for a do-no-harm approach). The current practice is counter-productive since no notice is given to the complainants, who give up their daily wages to come to court, only to find out that the presiding officer and prosecutor are absent. Hence, losing confidence in the Criminal Justice System (CJS).

Moving on, Rule 4(b), states that on the first day of the trial, the judge will hear and settle all technical and legal issues affecting maintainability, form and jurisdiction. This includes deciding the method for recording the evidence, through the ordinary procedure or via alternative ways, which may include use of a screen within the courtroom so that the victim is not able to see the defendant, assess and address the need for interpreters, any other special arrangement related to the different-ability of a victim, assess and address the need for any protection order for the victim or any vulnerable witness.

An important point to note is that I have dealt with cases where the accused is a juvenile. A case that memory does not allow me to forget is where a 15-year perpetrator committed rape of his three-year-old cousin. Which court will deal with cases where there is a juvenile involved? The special courts under the Juvenile Justice System Act (JJSA 2018) or the Anti-Rape Act? The rules under JJSA 2018 have not been notified as of yet. Perhaps, this can be decided by the judge (after considering the circumstances of the case) when following the process laid down under Rule 4.

Rule 5 lays down the ‘Procedure for trial’. It states that the “Court shall not grant more than two adjournments during the trial of a case, out of which one adjournment shall be upon payment of costs by the person seeking adjournment”.

Rule 6 mandates that the special court shall provide a conducive trial environment, “…which protects all parties, including the victim from secondary victimization and takes into consideration the victim’s specificities such as age, gender, mental state, different abilities.”

Rule 7 titled ‘Examination of the victim or witness’ allows the judge of the special court to adopt measures for examination of victim or witness, which include: use of video-link, screens, examination to be conducted in camera. It is important to note that these survivor-centric measures were already laid down in Salman Akram Raja v Government of Punjab (PLJ 2013 SC 107). Since it is a judgement of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, it serves as a binding precedent across all courts of Pakistan.

While the procedure for recording of evidence through videoconferencing is laid down in Rule 9, the facilities recommended for videoconferencing are stipulated under Rule 10. These include desktop, laptop, mobile devices with internet connectivity and printer; camera; microphones and speakers; display unit; document visualizer; alternative electricity source such as UPS or generator.

It is understood that these electronics and equipment are required for videoconferencing. The important bit, which the rules have failed to tackle are the burning questions: such as who will provide the equipment to the Special Courts? The federal or the provincial government? Will they be provided from the Prime Minister’s Anti-Rape Fund under Section 20 of the Anti-Rape Act? Even the provincial law, Sindh Witness Protection 2013 allows for videoconferencing, the reason why it is not utilised is due to the lack of resources.

In a nutshell, while the Anti-Rape (Trial Procedure) Rules, 2022 has introduced numerous praiseworthy mechanisms, such as the issuance of a ‘trial scheduling certificate’, a broader reading of the rules seem to have compiled pre-existing special protection mechanisms. A multi-coordinated approach of all justice stakeholders, CSOs and the government is required to devise a strategy on implementing the law, as outlined above.

The writer is a barrister. She tweets @RidaT95 and can be reached at:

ridaatahir@gmail.com

Read more

IT was Edmond Locard (1877-1966), the `Sherlock Holmes of France`, who came up with the `exchange principle` in criminal investigation. According to this principle, everything and everyone that enters a crime scene leaves some piece of evidence behind. Forensic science is an integral part of the modern criminal justice system. Its earliest application dates back to the ancient Greek and Roman societies.

Notable contributions were made by them in medicine, especially pharmacology, ie, the types of toxins and their uses and effects.

Significant efforts were made in China in the 13th century in pathology and entomology to solve crimes, while 16th-century Europe saw medical practitioners making further contributions to forensic medicine. By the 17th century, forensic science had begun to evolve into an important area of study. Later, the 18th and 19th centuries witnessed a breakthrough in the application of forensics in solving crimes via footprints, clothing fibre, fingerprints, ballistics, toxicology and DNA profiling. The 20th century saw law enforcement form special forensic teams for evidence-gathering and analysis, as crime scene investigation acquired a modern outlook.

Forensic analysis, which involves careful consideration of each piece of evidence at the crime scene, is an essential part of police work today. The investigation is helped by recreating the scene of crime in multiple ways to connect the crime with suspects, assess motives, identify the weapon used or the method employed to commit the crime. It not only helps in narrowing down the suspects but also getting the real culprit convicted.

Forensic science provides the scientific basis for information through the analysis of physical evidence, the identity of the culprit through clues at the crime scene such as fingerprints, blood drops, hair, mobile phones, etc. Most crime today is committed, facilitated or abetted via digital means, making digital forensics another mode of investigation.

Traditional forensic analysis methods include chromatography, spectroscopy, hair and fibre analysis and serology (eg, blood/DNA examination). Advanced methods involve forensic anthropology, entomology, odontology, chemical analysis, criminal profiling, geographic profiling, document analysis, data analysis and audio/video analysis. The goal of using forensic tools is to connect the crime with the suspect and obtain a conviction after a trial.

To this end, there are two important aspects the preservation and recordingof the crime scene. Failure to accomplish these two crucial steps can jeopardise scientific evidence and end in the loss of forensic records. The law delineates the admissibility of evidence when collected properly and after following a clear chain of custody. Any contamination of the crime scene or the forensic evidence collected will affect the credibility of the investigation and give the accused an advantage.

Significant details of evidence that are required during a crime investigation are recorded at two levels. An examination is carried out for class characteristics and the other for accidental characteristics of the evidence. The former includes items like shoeprints, tool impressions, etc. If these point towards a suspect then there is sufficient circumstantial evidence and reasonable grounds for building up a case.

Accidental characteristics are unique marks and features that develop on any item resulting from wear and tear.

Investigators use accidental characteris-tics to link the suspect to the crime scene or the victim.

These days, criminal investigations are incomplete without forensic analysis, which contributes enormously to sol-ving heinous crimes and other forms of violence. Without the application of forensie science, it would be very difficult to catch any criminal, unless an eyewitness was present at the scene of crime. As soon as a crime is reported, police and other law-enforcement agencies become involved in the collection of evidence. The investigating officer tries to collect the maximum amount of proof found at the scene of crime, be it physical or digital; even minuscule evidence can affect the outcome of the case at hand. It is forensic science that deals with the analysis of the evidence to establish facts that are admissible in a court of law. Without the help of forensic science, murderers, thieves, drug traffickers and rapists would roam free.

It is therefore of utmost importance for police forces to keep pace with modern forensics in terms of their training, equipment and the use of analytical tools.

Rational and scientific methods are pivotal in making investigations transparent and their outcome certain.• The wúter is a police officer.

Twitter: @MariaTaimurPSP

Read more