EDITORIAL: Notorious sexual offender Usman Mirza and four of his partners-in-crime have been handed life imprisonment by an Islamabad district and sessions court. It may be recalled that in July of last year a video had gone viral on social media in which Mirza was seen in a hotel room forcing a couple to acknowledge they were subjected to sexual assault and say they like it, too.
Soon afterwards an FIR was registered against them under various sections of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) pertaining to use of criminal force against a woman and stripping her of her clothes, intimidation, act intended to insult modesty of a woman, rape, sexual abuses, extortion and wrongful confinement.
Mirza had got the video made, apparently, to blackmail the victims into silence. In fact, according to a press report, scores of videos found in his and accomplices’ cell phones showed a large number of boys and girls similarly subjected to sexual abuse.
It is unclear how the video in this instance got out to social media, but it caused countrywide anger and dismay. Prime Minister Imran Khan took notice of the heinous crime, promising strict action against the suspects.
And the police registered an FIR and arrested the suspects after the victims identified them and recorded their (the couple’s) statements before a magistrate under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), accusing Mirza and his accomplices of sexually abusing, filming and extorting money from them.
Yet it did not take long for them to retract the statements despite the video evidence. The reason is not difficult to fathom given that such criminals are known to use coercion and intimidation.
As the court verdict noted “it can safely be said that they have made their resiling [sic] statements either under pressure, under fear of coercion or by getting monetary benefits from the accused.” Or, one might add, the victims may have wanted to avoid involvement in legal proceedings, getting scared of causing embarrassment to themselves and their families.
Creditably for it, the prosecution forcefully pursued the case, on behalf of the state, basing its arguments, as the court observed in its verdict, on modern devices and technology to substantiate the evidence, and “succeeded to prove its case against the accused beyond doubt.”
It needs to be recognised that had it not been for the government to make the state a party to the case the accused would have walked free using the victims’ retraction. The unsavoury truth is also that the principal accused being an affluent businessman could have gone scot-free, as do many such criminals, using money and/or connections in the right places.
Thanks to the media and civil society highlighting the criminality of the accused, the system was impelled to bring them to justice. That seems to be the only way to ensure justice prevails in all cases, irrespective of a victim’s gender or status in society.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2022
Comments
Comments are closed.