ISLAMABAD: Last month, an accountability court was converted into a full-fledged eCourt. This new eCourt will hopefully allow for the secure trials of hardened criminals, ensure the protection of witnesses and the speedy disposal of cases, legal experts say.

In just one month, the accountability court has disposed of a Modaraba case in 20 days, recording the testimonies of 23 witnesses via Skype.

An Electronic Court – or eCourt – is any location where legal matters are decided, provided a judge is present, which has a developed technical infrastructure. This infrastructure could be anything that allows the court proceedings to function more smoothly, such as presenting evidence, filing judicial records or hearing testimony remotely.

For example, on one day, an accountability judge was scheduled to record the statements of seven witnesses. Witnesses travelled to the courtroom from Abbottabad, Taunsa Sharif and other remote areas, but police expressed their inability to produce the accused.

Inspired by 2013 SC verdict, electronic courts could go a long way in ensuring protection of witnesses, prosecutors

Under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), witnesses cannot testify in the absence of the accused person.

The accountability judge, Sohail Nasir, telephoned the Adiala Jail superintendent and asked him to bring the accused to his office. The accused then witnessed the proceedings through Skype as the witnesses testified.

How it all began

The concept of e-Courts had been discussed by a high-level commission consisting of three chief justices – Justice Faez Isa of the Balochistan High Court, Justice Musheer Alam of the Sindh High Court and Justice Iqbal Hameedur Rehman of the Islamabad High Court – during the proceedings of the Memogate Commission in 2012 when Mansoor Ijaz and Husain Haqqani recorded their statements through video link.

Recently, the anti terrorism court of Rawalpindi also recorded the statement of US lobbyist Mark Seigel through video link in the Benazir Bhutto murder case.

The difference between these earlier examples and the accountability court that connected to Adiala Jail through Skype is that in the former case, the video link facility was used temporarily and for recording the testimony of certain witnesses.

However, accountability judge Sohail Nasir has converted his courtroom into an eCourt, installing equipment with Rs100,000 without using federal government funds.

The judge got the idea from a 2013 verdict of the Supreme Court. While hearing a rape case, the court had directed that where possible, technology could be used to avoid delaying justice.

Dawn has learnt that Lahore High Court Chief Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah is considering establishing e-Courts throughout the province. At present, in addition to Rawalpindi, two e-Courts are functioning in Faisalabad and Gujranwala.

Cost-effective

As many as 200 under-trial prisoners are detained in Adiala Jail. The cost of producing a prisoner in court is over Rs50,000 per day. In Lahore, the number of under-trial prisoners is 1,500.

Bringing some of the high-profile accused to court creates a serious threat for litigants, lawyers, judges and police officials, according to court officials. The accused is then able to identify not just those testifying against him, but also the lawyers and judges involved in the case.

But it would be easier to keep their identities hidden if the presence of the accused is ensured through Skype – a pressing concern, especially in terrorism related cases.

Those who have worked on the concept of e-Courts say that a network of such courts could be established in 36 districts of Punjab, linking 40 jails of the province for less than Rs10 million.

An official argues that the cost of establishing this network will be less than the amount that is spent in one day alone, carting the various accused around for their court appearances.

Criticism

However, this is not to say that everyone is in favour of e-Courts. Critics feel that it would be difficult for judges to control discourse while recording the statements of witnesses and the accused and during cross-examination.

Another criticism is that it might be difficult for the judge to decide how satisfactory a witness has been.

In a courtroom, a judge can ascertain whether the witness is testifying voluntarily or under coercion. Legal experts are working to address the two main concerns discussed above.

However, President Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Syed Ali Zafar has termed the courts “a great step forward”.

He felt that e-Courts would be beneficial for litigants as well as lawyers. He said that lawyers would be at liberty to argue their cases from anywhere and would no longer need to seek adjournments.

“We need to set certain parameters for the effective use of e-Courts,” he added, pointing out that Singapore was the first country to establish such courts.

Published in Dawn, July 9th, 2016