Principle of Life Expectancy in Pakistan

Due to delays in conclusion of trials or disposal of appeals in criminal cases, courts granted convicts or accused incarcerated relief of adjusting the time period spent in jail against the sentence imposed - this was the rule of thumb quarter century ago. This was eagerly exploited by litigators who defeated the intention of common law by purposefully delaying disposal of cases so as to avail the relief of equitable principle of life expectancy. Hence, Pakistani courts moved against it (so did Indian, perhaps), and tended not to grant the said relief. In a relatively recent judgment[1], in para. 20, Hon. Jst. Asif S. Khosa reviewed the case from Indo-Pak jurisdictions and stated the current status of the principle of life expectancy as following:

"20. The discussion made above shows that as of today the following principles of practice are being followed by the courts of this country in respect of the principle of expectancy of life: 

(a) In a case where delay is occasioned in final disposition of a legal remedy being pursued by a convict sentenced to death on a charge of murder and where the undergone period of his incarceration is less than that of a term of imprisonment for life there the principle of expectancy of life for its use for the purpose of reduction of the sentence of death to imprisonment for life stands abandoned by the courts of this country.  

(b) In a case where the State or the complainant party is seeking enhancement of a sentence of imprisonment for life of a convict to death and before or during the pendency of such recourse the convict serves out his entire sentence of imprisonment for life and he has, or has not yet, been released from the jail there the principle of expectancy of life is still relevant for not enhancing the sentence of imprisonment for life to death. Article 13(a) of the Constitution is not directly relevant to such a situation but the spirit of that Article may be considered in such a case as a factor along with the other factors like expectancy of life and the facts and circumstances of the case, etc. for not enhancing the sentence of imprisonment for life to death at such a late stage.  

(c) In a case where a convict sentenced to death undergoes a period of custody equal to or more than a full term of imprisonment for life during the pendency of his judicial remedy against his conviction and sentence of death there the principle of expectancy of life may be a relevant factor to be considered along with the other factors for reducing his sentence of death to imprisonment for life."

In the instant cited case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan while applying the principle of life expectancy as stated above reduced the sentence of the two appellant from death to life imprisonment and extended them the benefit of undergoing their punishment for being incarcerated for the time spent during the pendency of trial and appeals. The Court distinguished the case from principle of double jeopardy and reasoned it as following:

21. We have also observed above that the stark reality staring us in the face is that both the appellants have already spent in custody a period more than a full term of imprisonment for life and if we uphold their sentences of death at this late stage then the appellants would, for all practical purposes, be punished with death after spending a period in custody which is more than a full term of imprisonment for life and such a bizarre situation may run contrary to the letter and the spirit of section 302(b), P.P.C. which provides for a sentence of death or a sentence of imprisonment for life. Such a case may not strictly be termed as a case of double punishment but it can more appropriately be called a case of an unconscionably delayed punishment, delayed to such an extent that the punishment is aggravated beyond the contemplation of the relevant law itself.

___________________
[1] Pakistan Law Digest 2013 Supreme Court 763

A quote on the endeavor of Ijtihad in Islamic Law

Hamza Yusuf writes in his historical-juristic essay on the rulings of Islamic law on chess:

Contrary to the Orientalists’ claims that the gates of ijtihad were closed in the ninth century CE, ijtihad has always been an active endeavor of the community of jurists throughout the Muslim world.[4]

In the foot-note # 4, he writes:

The only closure—if there was one—was on what is known as “absolute ijtihad” that historically was achieved by a handful of scholars in the early part of Islam and later considered impossible to achieve. However, although many consider this door closed and locked, it has always been viewed as a door that is possible for one to enter, if one has the key. [Emphasis added.]

'Eye for an eye': "Pakistan court orders ears and noses to be cut off "

Topping 2nd as today's most read story at one point in time today, here comes a chilling decision by Pakistan court against two anti-women creatures (men, of course), amidst bombs exploding in my homeland:

'A Pakistani court has ordered that two men have their ears and noses cut off, as punishment for doing the same to a woman who refused to marry one of them.

The two brothers were found guilty of kidnapping 20-year-old Fazeelat Bibi, one of their cousins, in September.

Government prosecutor Ehtisham Qadir said the punishment had been awarded in accordance with the Islamic principle of "an eye for an eye".' [Source.]

Certain dubious human right activists said they approve very much of rights of women, but could not approve of this order of the honourable court. What does this reflect?In my fragile opinion (dhann), it reflects westernization of the brown people. Had this rule be made by Westerners (so as to be be changed after a 'reform', perhaps), they'd have protested against courts for not using 'this rarely invoked Islamic law'. Islamic law, or fiqh, which transcends this thing westerners are obsessed with, 'opinion', does not need any comparison from West, it'd have needed a comparison had West produced a personality like the second caliph of Islam, Umar ibn e Khatab, ra, the source of Islamic law, although many people including Believers much basic education about their imperishable heritage,

Islamic Law vs. Tahafaz-e-Haqooq-e-Nisawan (Women rights protection bill)

(Click to enlarge)

Daily Reflections: Evil & Society

Umer: What is NATURAL?

Master: Strictly speaking, whatever is free of human artificial interference. "Artificial" word comes from "artifact" i.e. hand made, manufactured etc. Only human interference can make things "unnatural"... "Nature" may not always be beneficial. It is better to construct 'bands' along river banks near population. It may be better to try to find new breeds of wheat, may be in some 'artificial' way. Natural way for a wound may be to let it untreated. But medical treatment is better! But if humans make fun of nature like homosexuality etc. Or such things, then it becomes EVIL. Here natural construction, growth etc. is being blocked therefore it's evil.

There have been and still continue to exist self-made and so-called, or let's call them independent intellectuals who are solely driven by the notions of freedom (to do) and independence from all the norms and conventions, preserved and passed 'by generations over centuries'. Expect them (i.e., thought patterns, conventions, etc.) to be faulty and obsolete, eliminate them. That's growth. But I am often amazed, and it's a funny thing to hear from such quarters arguing in defense of unnatural and evil, not amoral, practices. A rational person always sees things in a broader perspective, strives to integrate all colors in the same canvas and thinks beyond his or her personal likings and impulses. If our society discourages homosexuality (even though it persists to exist), it does so on the ground of its being unnatural. In a welfare society people seek to protect themselves and others from the evils which, obviously, go against human nature and reason.

Divine Power

Everything is said and observed to follow a law or perhaps the law. Our physical existence; the trees and plants; the sun and the moon - what else isn't subject to its will than a conscious human mind?

What is that law, this eternal truth? I think of it as nothing but Divine Power.

Mad, Mad, Mad Writers

There are sentences of 125, 159 and 218 words. This the minimum one, of only 62 words. Can you decipher the esotericism the following sentence contains deep within its inner being? Here is a humble sample:

Notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained no partial surrender may be effected unless both the sum payable on the partial surrender and the total after the surrender of the Participating Sum Assured and the Related Bonuses thereon and of all Further Paricipating Sums Assured and Related Bonuses thereon exceed a minimum sum which the Society shall determine at the time of partial surrender.

In the policy documents of Equitable Life,

a U.K. based insurance company.

Such Dishonesty Fits Right In

Crisis: Online/Offline Internet/Computer Data Theft

"Criminals who steal personal data [online] often don't exploit it. Instead, they put it up for sale on one of the many vibrant online black markets, forums and chat rooms," writes Benjamin Sutherland in "The Rise of Black Market Data", Newsweek, Dec 15 2008.

Time for IT ethics for financial instituitions. No, no. They aren't the culprits. They are to fight it. As Bernard Shaw, the writer, once said, "A fool's brain digests philosophy into folly, science into superstition, and art into pedantry. Hence University education." Thus, already established instituitions need thinking and re-thinking for things and matters very pertinent Harvard Business School Doesn't Teach Them.

ID theft, credit and debit card, personal data, guests data from hotel, online password of accounts, apart from all that they, the theft-theft bandits/hackers are 'legions', security experts say. More than that (in connection to the earlier quoted remark in the beginning of the post), "It's a price war," says Francois Paget, a security specialist for McAfee in Paris.

But their, world-wide hackers, tactics are even more effective against law-enforcement agencies: 'Stunning use of English, often using Russian.... in far, far away terrories like Russia and looting Paris...imagine the paper work between two authorities... meeting "in-person" offline to deliver stoled payment card details'. You name it.

Interestingly. 'Dishonesty' can be the best policy (or atleast effective) in order to fight data theft and smart cyber-criminals (as cunning as patwaris, corrupt low level government land data handlers, of Pakistan). Here's the quote:

"Specialists from some financial instituitions pose as buyers and sellers to gather information to aid law enforcement, or to disrupt markets. Bill Dunn, VP of fraud management at Visa Europe in London, says his team tries to intercept stolen credit-card details so the card company can cancel accounts before a theft occurs... Franklin, the Carnegie Mellon University researcher, explains another disruption technique: his team infiltrates markets and, posing as ripped-off buyers and sellers, slanders participants to foment confusion and mistrust. In the world of illict data markets, such dishonesty fits right in."

* All quotes from, "The Rise of Black Market Data," by Benjamin Sutherland, published in Newsweek, Dec 15, 2008.

Islamic Law

A read a very interesting point in fiqah (islamic law) which I wish to share here:

"There is a main rule in Islamic Law

that a particular regulation

which is made for a particular reason

is enforced only when that reason

is clearly in evidence"

From Our Dialouge, -Vol III, 1997.

Preface.

What do you feel and think about this rule?