- SC ANNOUNCES VERDICT ON JUDGE VIDEO SCANDAL CASE
- Says video of no legal use to Nawaz unless verified by IHC
ISLAMABAD, August 23: The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Friday wrapped up a set of petitions on a video leak scandal involving former accountability court Islamabad judge Muhammad Arshad Malik.
“We find that it may not be an appropriate stage for this court to interfere in the matter of the relevant video and its effects” since the video may have relevance to a criminal appeal presently sub judice before the Islamabad High Court (IHC), the judges said in the detailed verdict.
The verdict, authored by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, noted that five main issues needed to be attended by the top court; among them was the possible impact of the video – if proven to be authentic – on the ruling by judge Malik in the Al-Azizia Steel Mills corruption reference that had put away former premier Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif last year.
“His admitted conduct emerging from that press release and the affidavit stinks and the stench of such stinking conduct has the tendency to bring bad name to the entire judiciary as an institution,” the judgment read.
“His sordid and disgusting conduct has made the thousands of honest, upright, fair and proper judges in the country hang their heads in shame,” the CJP said.
The five issues addressed by the top court are as follows:
1. Relevant forum for consideration in Nawaz case
The first issue that the SC said needed to be discussed was regarding the relevant forum or court which could presently attend to the video for any “meaningful consideration” in the Nawaz case.
The chief justice noted that following conviction and sentencing by a trial court, an appeal submitted by Nawaz against the conviction was pending before the IHC.
Therefore, the court said that there “cannot be two opinions” that the IHC could alone at present “maintain, alter or set aside such conviction and sentence on the basis of the evidence brought on the record”.
“Any commission constituted by the government or by this court, any inquiry or investigation conducted by the police or by any other agency and any probe into the matter by any other institution or body can only render an opinion in the matter of the relevant video which opinion is treated by the law as irrelevant and it cannot per se be treated as evidence for the benefit of Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif in his appeal pending before the Islamabad High Court, Islamabad.”
“The relevant video cannot be of any legal benefit to Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif unless it is properly produced before the Islamabad High Court, Islamabad in the pending appeal, its genuineness is established and then the same is proved in accordance with the law for it to be treated as evidence in the case,” the verdict read.
2. Establishing video as ‘genuine piece of evidence’
The judgment said that with the advancement of science and technology, it was now possible to conduct a forensic examination to determine whether an audio tape or a video was genuine and whether it had been edited, doctored or tampered with.
It was noted that judge Malik had “asserted” that the conversation mentioned in the video had been “distorted and twisted”. The verdict added that as it had become easy to alter videos and audio tapes, it had become increasingly unsafe to rely on them as evidence without a forensic examination, audit or test.
“The standard of proof required in a criminal case is beyond reasonable doubt and any realistic doubt about an audio tape or video not being genuine may destroy its credibility and reliability.”
3. If genuine, how will video be proven before court of law?
The judgment listed numerous requirements in order to prove an audio tape or a video before a court of law.
Among others, the requirements include:
No audio tape or video can be relied upon by a court until the same is proved to be genuine and not tampered with or doctored
A forensic report prepared by an analyst of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency in respect of audio tape or video mentioned in the petitions is per se admissible in evidence
Accuracy of the recording must be proved and satisfactory evidence has to be produced so as to rule out any possibility of tampering with the record
The person recording the conversation or event has to be produced and must produce the audio tape or video himself
An audio tape or video produced before a court as evidence ought to be clearly audible or viewable
The source of an audio tape or video becoming available has to be disclosed
According to the judgment, an appellate court can take additional evidence under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). – Sabah
