ISLAMABAD: PTI leader Malik Umar Aslam objected on Thursday before the Supreme Court over a report of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, which validated educational record of Sumaira Malik, his opponent in the NA-69 Khushab constituency.

The report had authenticated the claim of Sumaira Malik that she did not commit any forgery in her graduation examination form.

Ms Malik had moved a review petition before the Supreme Court which in 2012 had slapped a life ban on her to become a member of parliament for possessing a fake degree. Authored by former chief justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, the judgment had held that the BA degree of Ms Malik had been a result of impersonation, fraud and falsehood.

Hence such a person was not qualified to contest for not being sagacious, righteous, non-profligate and honest as ordained by Article 62(1-f) of the constitution.

Later a larger bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, had ordered the PFSA to verify the photographs of Ms Malik, which were attached with her educational record.

Malik Umar Aslam, through his counsel Hamid Khan, moved an application and objected to the forensic report and stated that it seemed to be incorrect, dishonest, biased and prepared and presented under undue influence and pressure of the government in power. He requested the court to reject the report.

The applicant alleged that the petitioner belonged to a political party, which is in power in Punjab and the federal government and wields huge influence over officials like the person making the report.

The human-beings are yet to invent technology better than the divine technology of a human eye, the applicant said, adding that the discerning quality of human eye in distinguishing human faces, their structures, features and other attributes cannot be matched by so-called modern technologies.

Thus the human eye does not lie but reports do. Therefore, former chief justice Iftikhar’s bench, while hearing the appeal, correctly decided to inspect and decipher with naked eyes the identity of the person through comparison of photographs of the person who took the examination.

The applicant contended that any court can undertake exercise of inspection of photographs and other evidence itself under Article 84 of the Qanoon-i-Shahadat, 1984.

The PTI candidate stated that comparison of the photographs makes it clear that they belong to different females.

“The photographs of Sumaira Malik show a broad-jawed lady whereas the lady who appeared in the examination does not have broad jaw,” the applicant stated and explained that the lips, forehead, nose, chin and other features of the two women in photographs were very different. Even a person with week eyesight can decipher that, the applicant emphasised.

Malik Aslam stated that the so-called laboratory expert could not see that there was significant difference in the ages of two women in photographs.

The applicant contended that the photograph of Sumaira Malik depicted a lady of around 40 years of age and the lady with glasses, who actually appeared in the examination, appears to be in her twenties.

Published in Dawn, March 4th, 2016