Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Tragedy and The Farce of Legal Flirtations With The
The Tragedy and The Farce of Legal Flirtations With The
The Tragedy and The Farce of Legal Flirtations With The
These are the decisions that should have been discussed in the Commissions
order relating to Arjun Aloysius rather than case law referencing the Special
Presidential Commissions of Inquiry Act which has entirely different provisions
and operates in a separate context. True, the 2008 amendment creates a greater
potential of a different outcome. The specific power of the Attorney General to
indict on Commission findings may well be seen, (in the words of the judges in the
Siddique case), as a step in a statutory process which alters his legal position to
his disadvantage.
Nonetheless, these are issues of law which must be legally tested at some point.
The privilege against self-incrimination ordinarily applies in a court proceeding
where it may be pleaded to shut out testimony, not at an earlier stage. And
regardless of potential legal challenges, a great deal of latitude is given to fact
finding Commissions which are wholly different from courts of law enjoined to
abide by strict rules of evidence.
This is precisely why Section 7 (d) of the 1948 Act allows the Commission to admit
any evidence, whether written or oral which might be inadmissible in civil or
criminal proceedings, notwithstanding the Evidence Ordinance. While
Commissioners have generally been reticent in utilizing this permission, there is
no doubt that the intent of the legislature was clear when the provision was made
part of the law. Also Section 14 affords special immunity for witnesses which
the Commission in fact, declared itself mindful of, despite its later conclusion
that Aloysius is not a compellable witness.
Stopping spectacular abuse of public funds