Accountability Through Technology: Reforming Pakistan's Criminal Justice System through Body-Worn Cameras and Forensic Video Evidence

305 ACCOUNTABILITY THROUGH TECHNOLOGY: Reforming Pakistan's Criminal Justice System through Body-Worn Cameras and Forensic Video Evidence By Dr. Ambreen Aslam District and Sessions Judge, Karachi-West, High Court of Sindh, Ex-Judicial Member Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Visiting Faculty Sindh Judicial Academy Karachi, Pakistan. ambreenaslam8@gmail.com Abstract The criminal justice system in Pakistan continues to face persistent challenges arising from weak investigative practices such as lack of transparency, and deficiencies in the collection and preservation of evidence. These shortcomings frequently lead to evidentiary gaps, compelling courts to extend the benefit of doubt to the accused in accordance with settled principles of criminal jurisprudence.1 In an era marked by rapid technological advancement and evolving patterns of criminal activity, traditional methods of policing and evidence gathering have increasingly proven inadequate. This article examines the need for integrating body worn cameras and forensic video evidence as essential tools for enhancing accountability and improving evidentiary standards within Pakistan's legal framework. By analysing existing legal provisions, particularly under the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984,2 and highlighting practical shortcomings such as weak chain of custody and limited forensic utilisation, the study further, underscores systemic deficiencies that often undermine prosecution cases. At the same time, it argues that technological integration serves a dual purpose that is strengthening prosecution cases through objective and verifiable documentation while simultaneously safeguarding the constitutional right to fair trial under Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.3 Drawing upon comparative international practices, the article proposes a structured mechanism encompassing legislative reforms, institutional capacity building, secure data management, and forensic validation protocols. Such reforms are imperative to ensure that Pakistan's criminal justice system evolves in line with contemporary demands, thereby promoting fairness, reliability, and public confidence in the administration of justice. Keywords Criminal Justice System, Body-Worn Cameras, Forensic Video Evidence, Qanun-e-Shahadat, Electronic Evidence, Chain of Custody, Police Accountability, Digital Forensics, Pakistan, Transparency. Introduction The swift advancement of science and technology across the globe has primarily reformed governance structures and institutional accountability mechanisms. In the field of criminal justice, effective prevention in increasingly control of crime entail the integration of technological solutions which should be proficient of addressing the complexities of modem criminal activities. As every one is aware of the fact that as the opportunities for committing crimes are increasing, criminals are likewise inventing new ways to evade the grip of the law. In modem world we all are witnessing the surge and rise of financial frauds, scams, cyber crimes, short and long term kidnappings, gender based violence, white collar crimes, violent street crimes so far and so forth, these evolving factors pressing the need of the day to incorporate modern investigation techniques and modem technologies in to investigation process to prevent the crimes effectively. In Pakistan, conventional investigative approaches frequently found inadequate when confronted with modern forms of crime. As for the rise of crime in Pakistan key elements are urbanisation, internal migration, and socio economic disparities which have contributed to rising challenges specifically in metropolitan cities and police fails to nib those criminal activities due to lack of training, limited resources and due to limited manpower so for these reasons and in the absence of structured monitoring and reliable documentation mechanisms, investigative processes often rely heavily on oral testimony and informal recording practices, which predominantly fails because mostly complainants get enter in to back door compromises or some time fail to demonstrate the occurrence due to malleable memory or some time due to pressure of court environment so in such circumstances best solution to strengthen the criminal justice system is to use technology support to improve the efficiency of criminal justice system. As commonly it is noted that the police officials for arrest and recovery proceedings use their personal cell phones the evidentiary value of such recording depends on certain legal principles under the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984 and the rules relating to electronic evidence as without preservation of original devices, metadata, or secure chain of custody are not considerable because such practices raise serious evidentiary concerns and such deficiency commonly results in benefit of doubt where authenticity and continuity cannot be established.4 The Supreme Court of Pakistan has repeatedly held that even if a single reasonable doubt entitles it should be extended in favour of the accused as matter of right.5 The standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt remains the foundational principle of criminal adjudication.6 In such like suppositions where evidentiary gaps exist in relation to safe custody and transmission of case property the courts show reluctance to sustain convictions.7 In this context, the integration of body-worn cameras and forensic video evidence can play a vital role for transparency and accountability to build and strengthen public confidence in criminal justice system. Despite increasing discussion on police reforms and digital governance in Pakistan, the evidentiary implications of technological recording techniques within the criminal justice process have gotten minimal professional consideration. Existing literature largely focuses on institutional reforms or policing strategies, however, there is still lack of research on the connection between technology documentation, the validity of the evidence, and the rights of a fair trial guaranteed under the Constitution. By examining the possible use of body-worn cameras and forensic video evidence, this article aims to identify that gaps within Pakistan's evidentiary framework, predominantly under the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. Admissibility of Evidence and Legal Limitations under Qanun-e-Shahadat The admissibility and evaluation of evidence in Pakistan are governed primarily under the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984.8 The law emphasises reliability, relevance, and proper mode of proof. Article 38 renders admission/ statements made before a police officer inadmissible, reflecting concerns regarding coercion and involuntariness.9 Yet in some criminal jurisdictions it is admissible if it is recorded in presence of higher rank police officer such as SP with certain safeguards, as the legal framework in terrorism-related prosecutions provides a limited exception whereby a confession recorded before a police officer of the rank of Superintendent of Police may be treated as admissible evidence, then this propriety raises the question whether similar mechanisms could be applied in other frameworks. As previously indicated, oral testimony from the public or police frequently contains gaps that result in an acquittal or, in some cases, a conviction. In these situations, technological assistance in conjunction with forensic evidence is inevitable. Indeed Article 164 QSO empowers courts to admit evidence obtained through modern devices or scientific techniques.10 However, its practical utilisation remains inconsistent. As in cases involving defective chain of custody, the superior courts have emphasised strict compliance with safe custody requirements. In Ikramullah v. The State, the Supreme Court underlined the necessity of maintaining an unbroken chain of custody, observing that lapses materially affect evidentiary credibility.11 I Similarly, in matters involving electronic data, the prosecution bears the burden of establishing authenticity, integrity, and endurance.12 These principles operate within the broader constitutional framework. Articles 4. 10-A, and 14 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan collectively guarantee due process, fair trial, and dignity of the individual.13 Technological reform must therefore improve evidentiary reliability while fully respecting constitutional safeguards. Role of Body-Worn Cameras and Forensic Video Evidence The integration of body-worn cameras represents a significant development in modem policing. Such devices enable real-time recording of police interactions, arrests, and recovery proceedings, thereby ensuring transparency and accountability. When properly regulated, they provide objective documentation capable of reducing evidentiary disputes. Forensic video evidence, including CCTV footage and authenticated digital recordings, assists courts in reconstructing crime scene with greater accuracy specifically when supported by a properly maintained chain of custody, such material becomes less susceptible to allegations of tampering. Comparative research suggests that body-worn cameras, when applied with systematized activation policies and oversight mechanisms, may reduce complaints against police officers and improve evidentiary clarity.14 As policy guidance issued by the College of Policing in the United Kingdom accentuate secure storage, metadata preservation, and audit mechanisms to ensure evidentiary integrity.15 Similarly, research supported by the National Institute of Justice United States of America highlights that effectiveness depends upon institutional compliance and regulatory safeguards.16 Forensic video evidence has emerged as an significant constituent of modern criminal investigations. With the advancement of digital technology, video recordings captured through surveillance cameras, mobile devices, and body-worn cameras have become increasingly relevant in the administration of justice. Such recordings provide a visual account of events which could help the courts to reconstruct the events more clearly. Video evidence, as opposed to only oral testimony, provides an impartial account of the facts and reduces the chance of manipulation due to biased or cognitive loss. In many cases, forensic examination of video recordings helps establish the identity of suspects, the presence of individuals at the scene, and the manner in which an incident occurred. Additionally, modern forensic techniques allow professionals to verify digital recordings, detect tampering, and enhance video quality for evidentiary purposes. As a result, forensic video evidence can significantly reinforce the reliability of investigations and assist the courts in reaching at impartial conclusion. Nonetheless, the evidentiary value of such recordings depends upon proper collection, preservation, and chain of custody to ensure their authenticity and integrity as long as handled in accordance with forensic standards, video evidence can serve as a powerful instrument for enhancing transparency, accountability, and evidentiary reliability within the criminal justice system. In Pakistan, although electronic evidence is legally admissible under Article 164 QSO and related statutory provisions such as the Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 and the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016.17 The absence of uniform standard operating procedures often results in inconsistent application. Without forensic validation, secure storage protocols, and structured metadata preservation, even technologically recorded evidence may lose probative value before the courts. Comparative Perspective Comparative practice shows that, when supported by well-defined legal frameworks, technology integration can significantly enhance accountability. Body-worn camera regulations in the US and the UK include strong data management procedures, audit trails, and mandatory activation requirements. By setting clear preservation durations, restricting accessibility, and implementing effective monitoring procedures, these governments additionally tackle issues related to privacy. Such systems' effectiveness relies not just on the availability of technology but also on the reliability of the legal frameworks that regulate its implementation. The use of technology in law enforcement developed in a number of Middle Eastern governments. For example, the United Arab Emirates utilized innovative police techniques and advanced surveillance systems, enabling officials to monitor incidents using digital recordings and monitoring technology. In the same manner, governments like Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Singapore, India, and Japan are gradually integrating technological tools and digital monitoring into their legal systems for law enforcement and investigation. A broader movement toward technologically assisted investigations targeted at improving transparency and evidential integrity is apparent in the increasing dependence on video recordings and electronic evidence. These comparative models show that rather than being incorporated selectively, advanced technology reform needs to be institutionally ingrained. Challenges in Adoption of Technology in Pakistan Considering the apparent advantages associated with technology integration, there are substantial institutional and practical barriers to its implementation within Pakistan's criminal justice system. One of the primary problems is the insufficient technological infrastructure and standard equipment, which hinders the effective application of secure digital recording systems and body-worn cameras. The use of personal mobile phones threatens compromising the credibility of evidence in the lack of officially recognized and specifically identified recording devices. A persistent issue is the inability to preserve an adequate chain of custody. The Supreme Court has frequently emphasised that safe custody and unbroken transmission of case property are indispensable to sustaining a conviction.18 Any break in the evidentiary chain creates doubt regarding authenticity and integrity. Additionally, inadequate training of law enforcement personnel in management of electronic and digital evidence further weakens its evidentiary value. Improper storage, lack of metadata preservation and delayed forensic examination often effect in weakened prosecution cases. The prosecution has the burden of establishing the truthfulness, consistency, and reliability of such evidence, as is the case when dealing with electronic data. A further major barrier is financial constraints. A consistent financial commitment is required in order for purchasing body-worn cameras, secure data servers, encryption systems, and forensic devices. The objective of transparency could be hindered by imperfect or uneven achievement. Misuse or controlled activation of recording devices is an additional serious problem. The possibility of recording being switched off at real time cannot be ignored in the absence of regulations and mandatory initialization procedures. Comparative research underlines that technical disposition without strong policy implementation would undermine accountability objectives.19 Data security and privacy considerations must also be considered. The Constitution safeguards dignity and privacy under Article 14,20 and any scientific framework must operate within these constitutional limits. Secure storage, restricted access, encryption protocols, and audit trails are indispensable components of reform. Recommendations and Way Forward 1. Legislative Backing The Police Rules and procedural rules should be amended adequately to mandate the recording of arrests, search and seizure processes, interrogations, and recovery procedures with the intent to offer a legislative justification. Modern electronics are currently recognized as admissible evidence under Article 164 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order however, the general application could potentially be strengthened by stricter statutory guidelines. In following the evidence rules governing chain of custody, video material must be sealed securely, documented, and exhibited before the trial court in order to be lawfully classified as case property. 2. Official Equipment Law enforcement agencies must be well equipped with official body-worn cameras and provided recording devices, significantly bearing unique and certifiable identificatipn number allocated to the individual team /member or agency. Such regulatory standard would ensure authenticity, findability, and evidentiary credibility. The usage of private mobile phones for recording evidence must, therefore, be strictly forbidden, as it weakens both credibility and forensic reliability. 3. Secure Storage and Metadata Preservation A protected digital storage infrastructure should be developed through current Safe City initiatives and police IT systems. Compulsory end-of-shift uploading procedures, escorted by metadata along with officer identification, timestamps, date, time and GPS location, this initiative shall be implemented. Comparative operational guidance in jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom exhibit the significance of organized upload and audit systems.21 4. Data Protection and Lapses The framework shall be designed to govern the system's privacy and transparency by defining formally recognized standards, which shall be made mandatory. Such regulations must be structured to regulate accessibility to recorded footage, stipulating the individuals/person's authorization to view, handle, and evaluate such recordings. Every event of retrieval shall generate a traceable account trail to ensure transparency and accountability. Furthermore, recordings pertaining to a particular case shall be protected and properly identified and be kept apart from general records, in accordance with secure and clearly defined preservation protocols. Aforementioned framework must be in conformity with Articles 4, 10-A, and 14 of the Constitution, ensuring that technological convergence improves procedural justice rather than jeopardizing human freedom.22 5. Forensic Certification In cases where authenticity and genuineness of digital evidence is disputed or doubtful, the verification of the evidence through recognised forensic laboratories should be ensured. The integration of forensic science builds up evidentiary credibility and reduces the probability of doubt arising from procedural lapses. The Supreme Court has highlighted the importance of scientific corroboration in cases involving evidentiary contestation.23 6. Training and Institutional Capacity Building In order to make this system workable is necessary that all stakeholders of judicial system including Law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and judges they all should participate in extensive training programs to ensure success of effective and progressive system. Both technical knowledge and doctrinal proficiency are necessary for the efficacious evaluation of electronic evidence as the trustworthy digital evidence may not have the desired evidentiary impact in the absence of institutional capacity building. To keep an eye on compliance and stop selective or inappropriate use of technology, independent procedures shall be implemented. Conclusion It is a matter of fact that Pakistan's criminal justice system is confronted with multiple challenges, among which a significant challenge is financial constraints and the unavailability of adequate resources and the shortage of skilled human resources, some of the elements in derailing the system are weak investigations, lack of transparency, and evidentiary deficiencies necessitate a structured shift towards modern technological integration. The progression of crime and increasing complexity of urban environments render traditional investigative methods inefficient. The integration of body-worn cameras and forensic video evidence would not only contribute a valuable means of enhancing accountability but would also strengthening prosecutorial reliability, and fair trial yet such technological tools not only assist the prosecution through objective documentation but also protect the rights of the accused by ensuring transparency in investigative processes. Nevertheless, successful implementation requires a balanced approach which shall completely supported by legislative clarity, institutional capacity building, robust data governance, forensic authentication, and unweaving adherence to constitutional safeguards. Without these foundational components, the capability of technological reform may remain unexecuted. It is therefore indispensable that Pakistan moves towards a system in which technology supplement the rule of law, ensuring that justice is administered through transparent, reliable, and scientifically supported processes. 1 Muhammad Mansha v. The State (2018 SCMR 772). 2 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973, Art 10A. 3 Ikramullah v. The State (2015 SCMR 1002). 4 Muhammad Mansha (2018 SCMR 772). 5 Tariq Pervez v. The State (1995 SCMR 1345). 6 Ikramullah v. The State (2015 SCMR 1002). 7 Ikramullah v. The State (2015 SCMR 1002). 8 Ikramullah v. The State (2015 SCMR 1002). 9 Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 Art. 164. 10 Ikramullah v. The State (2015 SCMR 1002). 11 Khurram Qadeer v. The State (2017 SCMR 188). 12 Constitution of Pakistan 1973, Arts 4, 10A, 14. 13 Barak Ariel and others, 'The Effect of Police Body-Worn Cameras on Use of Force and Citizens' Complaints' (2017) 31 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 509. 14 College of Policing (UK), Body-Worn Video: Operational Guidance (2022). 15 National Institute of Justice, Body-Worn Cameras: What the Evidence Tells Us (2018). 16 Electronic Transactions Ordinance 2002; Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016. 17 College of Policing (n 15). 18 Khurram Qadeer v. The State (2017 SCMR 188). 19 Barak Ariel and others, 'The Effect of Police Body-Worn Cameras on Use of Force and Citizens' Complaints' (2017) 31 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 509. 20 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973, Art 14. 21 College of Policing (UK), Body-Worn Video: Operational Guidance (2022). 22 Constitution of Pakistan 1973, Arts 4, 10A, 14. 23 Tariq Pervez v. The State (1995 SCMR 1345).