Legal Experts' analysis on arrest of PTI women
Legal Experts' analysis on arrest of PTI women
Transcript
00:00 Sir, I have read out this case to you and the lawyer of Khadija says that the police need 30 more days of custody
00:09 and when the judge has asked for remand again, the judge has been changed.
00:14 So this is how this case is being presented.
00:16 Mr. Hafiz, is this normal?
00:18 Or is it something that we feel is being fixed in this case?
00:21 Because you practice. Is this a regular thing?
00:23 The judge doesn't come, the prosecutor doesn't come,
00:25 you go to the next hearing and then go to the next hearing?
00:28 In the name of Allah, thank you very much for giving me this opportunity.
00:32 The punching line you have put in this case is on this system.
00:35 I will talk about this system first and then I will come to this specific issue.
00:39 There are no two opinions in this that the criminal justice system of Pakistan,
00:43 the civil justice system of Pakistan or the administrative justice system of Pakistan
00:47 has almost collapsed.
00:49 There are three or four fundamental reasons for its collapse.
00:52 One of the fundamental reasons is that this is an outdated system,
00:55 the system given by the British.
00:58 Even today, we have adopted the Pakistan Penal Code of 1860,
01:02 our Criminal Procedure Code of 1898,
01:05 our Civil Procedure Code of 1908
01:08 and our Commercial Laws Arbitration Act of 1940.
01:12 After that, we adopted the Indian Act of 1935 and brought it into our country.
01:20 We had a dream that when Pakistan was established,
01:25 it would have new rules of law, law changes and equality.
01:29 All these things that were to come after the resolution of 1940,
01:33 after 1947, have not come to this day.
01:35 What are the results of this?
01:37 The result is that you are living in the 21st century
01:41 and your system is running in the 19th century.
01:45 And that system is the one that the British had created to defeat the people of this country and to rule them.
01:52 Now, it should have been that this system should have been changed,
01:55 the capacity of our courts should have been increased,
01:57 the strength of the courts should have been increased,
01:59 the outdated system should have been changed,
02:01 the procedure on which the pressure was given,
02:03 which was imposed on it, should have been removed.
02:06 But unfortunately, what happened is that
02:08 the responsibility of this country should have been on this system of justice,
02:12 but it has not happened.
02:15 The result of that is that there is no conviction in your country,
02:17 it is almost 5%.
02:19 The cases in your country for years,
02:21 whether they are in special courts,
02:23 whether they are regular courts, high court, supreme court,
02:26 and sometimes it happens that your cases are taken up after your death.
02:31 Similarly, your civil system takes 20-24 years,
02:35 so the fundamental responsibility was to replace this law.
02:38 Now comes the second aspect.
02:41 The second aspect is that since in our country,
02:44 the prosecution which should have been efficient at this level,
02:48 is not there, the court's capacity is not there,
02:50 and in other countries of the world,
02:52 they have changed their laws and prosecutions.
02:55 Now, in that, since it has lacunae,
02:58 and the biggest thing I think in our system is that
03:02 our judges do not have a proactive role,
03:04 that if they get something,
03:06 then they should not grant it for granted and then bail it out,
03:09 or adjourn it,
03:11 but they should do substantive proceedings on it,
03:14 so that the case can move forward.
03:16 If that person is innocent, he should be punished,
03:18 if that person is innocent, he should be acquitted,
03:21 and if there is a delay in that,
03:22 then he should be bailed out and removed from the situation.
03:25 Now, since after 9th May,
03:27 I will come to this,
03:28 because I will specifically talk about these cases,
03:30 which you have presented a holistic picture,
03:32 after this I want to come to you,
03:34 I want to get the sense of it,
03:36 because we are following this case,
03:38 it is a high profile case,
03:40 I thought it would be fast tracked,
03:42 but what we are seeing is that
03:44 there is no prosecution,
03:46 and the judge is not coming,
03:50 is this a regular practice?
03:52 Because you have a lot of expertise,
03:55 you present yourself in front of the judges,
03:57 is this a unique thing that we are seeing?
04:01 See, Mr. Gareeb,
04:03 what Mr. Hafiz said here,
04:05 I partially agree with him,
04:07 that there needs to be a lot of reforms in our judicial system,
04:10 but when we talk about this case,
04:12 because we have gathered here to talk about this,
04:15 then one big thing is clear,
04:17 the real problem is that your whole system,
04:19 whether it is your judicial system,
04:21 or your democracy,
04:22 it is basically captured,
04:24 it is captured somewhere else,
04:25 this case is an expression of that,
04:27 if you see the incidents of 9th May,
04:29 and leave everything else,
04:31 leave the political workers,
04:33 and just talk about women,
04:35 you will see that in this case,
04:37 the system is so badly exposed,
04:39 that your political system of Pakistan,
04:42 the judicial system of Pakistan,
04:44 where are the decisions made?
04:46 How is it being run?
04:48 I will tell you as far as the bail is concerned,
04:50 if we talk,
04:51 I will tell you something very clear,
04:53 that the courts, as they know,
04:55 are sensitized,
04:56 and there is a need to be sensitized,
04:58 and those who want,
04:59 they exercise their rights,
05:01 now it is very easy,
05:02 Article 10 is present in the constitution,
05:04 and the courts,
05:05 to secure their fundamental rights,
05:08 to protect them,
05:10 the role of the courts has been there,
05:12 and where they want,
05:13 they play that role,
05:14 but when this case comes in front,
05:16 then one thing is very clear,
05:18 that it is basically a track down,
05:20 on your political system,
05:22 on a political community,
05:24 and with that we see,
05:25 that the participation of women,
05:27 and the women who were there,
05:28 to discourage them,
05:29 everything was done,
05:30 and the wrong use of the law,
05:32 to increase the illegality,
05:34 within the veil of the law,
05:36 within the veil of the law,
05:37 all this is being victimized,
05:39 it is not that someone is telling you,
05:41 that someone else is coming out openly,
05:43 but Rabia,
05:44 one point,
05:45 you are saying that the use of the law,
05:47 that there are gaps in the law,
05:49 there is a gap in the law,
05:51 it is used in the past,
05:53 it is used in common cases,
05:55 but how will you fill the gaps,
05:57 if the prosecutor is not present,
05:59 in Pakistan,
06:00 the cases go on for 30 years,
06:02 so you are taking advantage of the same things,
06:05 which have not been corrected,
06:07 the system has not corrected.
06:09 See, it is very easy,
06:11 if we talk about the High Court,
06:13 during the holidays,
06:14 you saw that there were 6 benches,
06:16 for the hearing of this case,
06:17 there is no mandatory for the court,
06:19 that they keep waiting for the prosecutor,
06:21 if he does not come on one date,
06:22 the next day the court,
06:23 will decide the case,
06:25 but we are seeing that,
06:27 it has been 3 months,
06:29 2.5 months,
06:30 we have been in the High Court,
06:31 apart from that,
06:32 one more alarming thing,
06:33 is that,
06:34 they did not present the statement,
06:35 if they had any incrementing evidence,
06:37 so when they present the statement,
06:39 people will know,
06:40 what is the case against them,
06:41 what evidence the prosecution has,
06:42 then the second thing,
06:43 as we just talked,
06:44 that in this case,
06:45 when the holidays are ending,
06:47 and the hearing of the cases,
06:49 is about to start again,
06:50 in fact,
06:51 there were chances,
06:52 that the court would have,
06:53 concluded the case,
06:54 now,
06:55 to tackle this,
06:56 what the prosecution has done,
06:58 is that,
06:59 in the same case,
07:00 new provisions have been added,
07:02 and in which,
07:03 there is no need to remand,
07:04 but I think,
07:05 it is illegal,
07:06 because the custodial investigation,
07:08 could have been done,
07:09 instead of that,
07:10 remand has been done again,
07:11 so that the bail will be delayed,
07:13 so in this,
07:14 the court has full authority,
07:15 yes,
07:16 ok,
07:17 your point has come,
07:18 Hafiz sahab,
07:19 now,
07:20 we are talking about,
07:21 the case of Rabia Rabisi,
07:22 which we are talking about,
07:23 and you have not been presented,
07:24 as a prosecutor,
07:25 so can the court,
07:26 give this decision,
07:27 on one hand,
07:28 and on the other hand,
07:29 can you tell us,
07:30 about this?
07:31 let me tell you,
07:32 that when we express,
07:33 our things,
07:34 so if we go,
07:35 towards expansion,
07:36 then the ultimate advantage,
07:37 of that case,
07:38 is not in the people,
07:39 involved in that case,
07:40 now,
07:41 if we talk about this,
07:42 specifically,
07:43 in the case,
07:44 you have talked about,
07:45 that the detention,
07:46 which the court,
07:47 is currently in custody,
07:48 it should be decided,
07:50 quickly,
07:51 there are three aspects,
07:52 one of the aspects is,
07:53 that the things,
07:54 which were tried,
07:55 first,
07:56 you should go,
07:57 and apply for bail,
07:58 on those things,
07:59 one thing is,
08:00 if the court,
08:01 does not grant the bail,
08:02 then it can be done,
08:03 in the high court,
08:04 as well,
08:05 the second,
08:06 which is important,
08:07 is that,
08:08 in the court,
08:09 it can be said,
08:10 that you,
08:11 again and again,
08:12 the report of 173,
08:13 is coming,
08:14 instead of that,
08:15 you should tell the prosecution,
08:16 that you have been,
08:17 completing your evidence,
08:18 and after that,
08:19 the report of 173,
08:20 should be brought,
08:21 so,
08:22 if things are,
08:23 taken forward,
08:24 in this way,
08:25 then things can,
08:26 go forward,
08:27 the second important thing is,
08:28 that because,
08:29 in the case,
08:30 you have talked about,
08:31 that this is the case,
08:32 of Pakistan,
08:33 because there are two aspects,
08:34 one is,
08:35 the aspect of anti-terrorism law,
08:36 and the second,
08:37 is the aspect of military court,
08:38 now the second,
08:39 but the women,
08:40 are not in the military court,
08:41 no,
08:42 I am doing it in that context,
08:43 when the case,
08:44 has gone to the supreme court,
08:45 then the supreme court,
08:46 has not yet,
08:47 come to a final conclusion,
08:48 on the proceedings,
08:49 which the supreme court,
08:50 should have,
08:51 that it should have,
08:52 come to a final conclusion,
08:53 that the civilians of Pakistan,
08:54 can they come to the military court,
08:55 or not,
08:56 and this is,
08:57 one of the judgments,
08:58 that has come to the supreme court,
08:59 that the civilians,
09:00 can come to the military court,
09:01 under special situations,
09:02 so,
09:03 if all these things,
09:04 are taken simultaneously,
09:05 as a legal acumen,
09:06 then it is absolutely right,
09:07 that whoever is charged,
09:08 in Pakistan,
09:09 and the special situation,
09:10 should be brought,
09:11 in the military court,
09:12 and the supreme court,
09:13 should be brought,
09:14 in the military court,
09:15 and the special situation,
09:16 should be brought,
09:17 in the military court,
09:18 and the supreme court,
09:19 should be brought,
09:20 in the military court,
09:21 and the supreme court,
09:22 should be brought,
09:23 in the military court,
09:24 and the supreme court,
09:25 should be brought,
09:26 in the military court,
09:27 and the supreme court,
09:28 should be brought,
09:29 in the military court,
09:30 and the supreme court,
09:31 should be brought,
09:32 in the military court,
09:33 and the supreme court,
09:34 should be brought,
09:35 in the military court,
09:36 and the supreme court,
09:37 should be brought,
09:38 in the military court,
09:39 and the supreme court,
09:40 should be brought,
09:41 in the military court,
09:42 and the supreme court,
09:43 should be brought,
09:44 in the military court,
09:45 and the supreme court,
09:46 should be brought,
09:47 in the military court,
09:48 and the supreme court,
09:49 should be brought,
09:50 in the military court,
09:51 and the supreme court,
09:52 should be brought,
09:53 in the military court,
09:54 and the supreme court,
09:55 should be brought,
09:56 in the military court,