Many a things at the basic level, when understood make life very
easy. The concept of standard of proof is one of them. The different set
of proof is required in civil and criminal cases.
In Pakistan the law profession is the easiest to qualify but hardest to practice. In countries like UK and America, it is very hard to qualify but easier to practice. But easy to practice, is qualified with the rigorous diligence and continuous professional updates.
The hardship an advocate faces in the start of his profession is many folds, in Pakistan. There is no fixed salary, no stipend or reward. There is no coaching at all.
I will revert to the ills the young lawyers face on some other occasion but here I will try to elaborate some basic concepts related to practical and academic side of the law practice.
In civil cases, we have to prove that the preponderance of evidence is in our favor. On the other hand, in criminal cases the standard of proof is beyond any doubt.
Now a day, instead of preponderance of evidence, the balance of probabilities is more often used in civil cases especially in the cases of immigration. The balance of probability is easier to understand than the jaw breaking preponderance.
The immigration officer will have to decide every case, for example a visit to UK, on the balance of probabilities. The probability of a person returning back home because of his age, roots, financial position etc when outweigh of the probability to stay in UK, the officer will give the visa. The balance was tilted towards a person returning home.
If there are no home ties, no demanding relations and no financial independence, the balance of probability is on the side of not returning back from UK.
In the criminal cases, the standard of proof is not on balance but beyond any doubt. This is understandable as one cannot hang a person on the balance of probabilities. The murder with all its propensities will have to be proved so that a person could be punished with the maximum.
The doubt in criminal cases is endeavored to be projected just to weaken the standard of proof. The required standard of “beyond any doubt” is to be fulfilled for any punishment under the criminal law.
There is hardly any substitute of hard work but the seniors should flex out of their complexes and guide the juniors and, appreciate their talents which are in plenty I am sure.
In Pakistan the law profession is the easiest to qualify but hardest to practice. In countries like UK and America, it is very hard to qualify but easier to practice. But easy to practice, is qualified with the rigorous diligence and continuous professional updates.
The hardship an advocate faces in the start of his profession is many folds, in Pakistan. There is no fixed salary, no stipend or reward. There is no coaching at all.
I will revert to the ills the young lawyers face on some other occasion but here I will try to elaborate some basic concepts related to practical and academic side of the law practice.
In civil cases, we have to prove that the preponderance of evidence is in our favor. On the other hand, in criminal cases the standard of proof is beyond any doubt.
Now a day, instead of preponderance of evidence, the balance of probabilities is more often used in civil cases especially in the cases of immigration. The balance of probability is easier to understand than the jaw breaking preponderance.
The immigration officer will have to decide every case, for example a visit to UK, on the balance of probabilities. The probability of a person returning back home because of his age, roots, financial position etc when outweigh of the probability to stay in UK, the officer will give the visa. The balance was tilted towards a person returning home.
If there are no home ties, no demanding relations and no financial independence, the balance of probability is on the side of not returning back from UK.
In the criminal cases, the standard of proof is not on balance but beyond any doubt. This is understandable as one cannot hang a person on the balance of probabilities. The murder with all its propensities will have to be proved so that a person could be punished with the maximum.
The doubt in criminal cases is endeavored to be projected just to weaken the standard of proof. The required standard of “beyond any doubt” is to be fulfilled for any punishment under the criminal law.
There is hardly any substitute of hard work but the seniors should flex out of their complexes and guide the juniors and, appreciate their talents which are in plenty I am sure.
No comments:
Post a Comment