From Aspiration to Reintegration: Rethinking Pakis…

Pakistan observed World Hepatitis Day on 28 July in Islamabad with a renewed national commitment to eliminating Hepatitis C and strengthening public health interventions through coordinated action, innovation, and community engagement. Under the Prime Minister’s National Programme for the Elimination of Hepatitis C Infection, the Government of Pakistan has launched free screening, free diagnostic testing, and free treatment for Hepatitis C patients across the country. The initiative represents a major public health intervention aimed at reducing the country’s exceptionally high burden of the disease and ensuring that financial constraints do not prevent patients from receiving timely diagnosis and life-saving treatment. The ceremony was attended by the Federal Minister for Health, Syed Mustafa Kamal; the Federal Minister for Planning, Development and Special Initiatives, Professor Ahsan Iqbal; the WHO Country Representative, Dr. Luo Dapeng; the Federal Secretary for Health, Muhammad Aslam Ghori; Professor Dr. Saeed Akhtar, Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Pakistan Kidney and Liver Institute and Research Centre (PKLI&RC); the Chief Executive Officer of Dr. Akbar Niazi Teaching Hospital, Islamabad, Yasir Khan Niazi; Dr. Huma Qureshi; and Dr. Hassan Mahmood, Country Head of Integral Global. International delegates, representatives of national and international organizations, and leading health experts were also present. The event was organized by the Project Management Unit of the Prime Minister’s National Programme for the Elimination of Hepatitis C Infection under the leadership and supervision of Project Director Dr. Zia Dawar, in collaboration with Dr. Akbar Niazi Teaching Hospital, Islamabad, and Integral Global. The gathering provided an important platform to assess progress, discuss future strategies, and reaffirm Pakistan’s determination to achieve Hepatitis C elimination through evidence-based policies, strong partnerships, and effective implementation mechanisms. Hepatitis C remains a major public health concern worldwide, but the scale of the challenge is particularly serious in Pakistan. A large number of infected individuals remain unaware of their condition because the disease may progress silently for years without producing obvious symptoms. Limited access to screening, delayed diagnosis, unsafe medical practices, inadequate awareness, and the high cost of treatment have historically prevented many patients from seeking timely care. The introduction of free screening, testing, and treatment under the Prime Minister’s National Programme therefore marks a significant shift in Pakistan’s response. It recognizes that Hepatitis C cannot be eliminated merely by treating patients who reach hospitals at an advanced stage. Instead, a comprehensive national strategy is required to identify undiagnosed cases, provide confirmatory testing, ensure immediate access to treatment, prevent new infections, and maintain effective monitoring and surveillance systems. Addressing the gathering, Federal Minister for Health Syed Mustafa Kamal stated that Pakistan carries one of the highest burdens of Hepatitis C patients in the world. He warned that the disease continues to threaten millions of lives and places immense pressure on families, communities, and the national healthcare system. He emphasized that the government could not remain indifferent to a health crisis of such magnitude and had therefore launched a nationwide programme providing free screening, free testing, and free treatment to eligible patients. Federal Minister for Planning, Development and Special Initiatives Professor Ahsan Iqbal highlighted the need to integrate public health priorities into Pakistan’s broader national development agenda. He emphasized that a healthy population is the foundation of economic growth, social stability, productivity, and sustainable development. Illness not only affects individuals and families but also reduces workforce participation, increases household expenditure, and places additional pressure on national resources. Professor Ahsan Iqbal noted that investment in disease prevention and healthcare accessibility should not be viewed merely as an expenditure. Rather, it is a long-term investment in Pakistan’s human capital and future prosperity. He stressed that the elimination of communicable diseases such as Hepatitis C requires continuity of policy, effective planning, measurable targets, institutional coordination, and transparent implementation. The presence of international health partners at the event reflected the global importance of Pakistan’s hepatitis elimination agenda. WHO Country Representative Dr. Luo Dapeng appreciated Pakistan’s efforts to advance Hepatitis C elimination and reiterated the importance of sustained political commitment, strong surveillance, effective prevention, reliable data, public awareness, and universal access to treatment. He emphasized that international cooperation, technical expertise, and knowledge-sharing remain essential for strengthening national healthcare responses. Pakistan’s success in controlling Hepatitis C would not only protect millions of its citizens but would also contribute significantly to regional and global disease-elimination targets. Addressing the gathering online, Professor Dr. Saeed Akhtar emphasized that eliminating Hepatitis C requires more than treating individuals after they become seriously ill. He stressed the importance of prevention, widespread screening, early diagnosis, safe medical practices, public awareness, and timely access to effective treatment. Professor Dr. Saeed Akhtar observed that Pakistan possesses the medical knowledge and therapeutic tools necessary to control the disease. However, success will depend on sustained political commitment, effective implementation, and close cooperation among the federal and provincial governments, healthcare institutions, development partners, and local communities. Reliable data will enable policymakers to understand where infections are concentrated, which populations remain underserved, and whether screening and treatment programmes are producing the desired results. Without accurate monitoring, even well-funded programmes may struggle to measure their impact or address gaps in implementation. The participation of international delegates and eminent health professionals demonstrated the growing recognition of Pakistan’s hepatitis elimination efforts on the global health platform. Their engagement provided an opportunity to exchange knowledge, examine successful international models, and identify practical solutions for overcoming the challenges that continue to hinder progress. World Hepatitis Day serves as a reminder that Hepatitis C is preventable, diagnosable, and treatable. Its elimination is achievable when governments, healthcare professionals, communities, development partners, and international organizations work together with a shared vision and sustained commitment. Pakistan’s journey towards eliminating Hepatitis C is not merely a medical campaign. It is a national commitment to protecting lives, reducing health inequalities, preventing avoidable suffering, and ensuring that no individual is denied treatment because of poverty or limited access to healthcare. The Islamabad event conveyed a clear and powerful message; Hepatitis C elimination is possible through leadership, collaboration, public awareness, and sustained action. The

Pakistan does not have a shortage of governments. It has a shortage of governance. The Constitution promises power to the people, but the money and the decisions stay in provincial capitals. A mother in Khuzdar waits for a hospital that Quetta forgot to fund. A father in Sahiwal sends his child to a school that Lahore never inspects. The distance between the citizen and the state is not measured in miles. It is measured in signatures, files, and political mood. The Constitution already knows this is wrong. Article 140A says every province must devolve power to elected local representatives. But that is all it says, a skeletal clause with no fixed tenure, no election deadline, and no guaranteed funding. It is a promise written in smoke. A single signature can dissolve a local government, elections can be postponed indefinitely, and local budgets can be reduced to zero overnight. When the rules are this fragile, governance becomes impossible. A mayor who can be fired by ordinance cannot sign a contract to build a road. A council that may not exist next year cannot hire a professional to run a hospital. A budget that arrives only if the provincial finance minister is in a good mood cannot pay for textbooks or vaccines. The fix is not complicated. Article 140A must be strengthened to include three guarantees. Every elected local government must serve a full five-year term, synchronized with the provincial assembly. It cannot be dissolved by ordinance or executive order. The only way to remove it is a two-thirds vote of the provincial assembly, a high threshold that ensures broad consensus. When tenure is secure, local leaders can plan beyond the next political season. Local elections must happen on the same day as provincial assembly polls. When you vote for your MPA, you vote for your local councilor on the same ballot. The mayor is then elected by those councilors. The only difference is that the election actually happens, on time, every five years, without delay or discretion. And a fixed percentage of provincial development funds must flow to districts through a transparent formula, population plus backwardness plus performance. The money moves automatically to the local government account. No approval required. No delay permitted. With these three guarantees in place, the district becomes what it was meant to be: the place where governance actually happens. A mayor with a real budget and real time can fix the sewer on your street because he needs your vote in five years. A council with secure tenure can hire an engineer to repair the school roof instead of waiting for a file to move through a provincial secretariat. A health budget that arrives automatically can keep a doctor at the rural clinic six days a week. This matters across thousands of union councils and hundreds of tehsil and municipal bodies that already exist under provincial local government acts, from the largest metropolitan corporations to the smallest town committees. Each one represents citizens who currently have a vote but no voice, a representative but no revenue. In districts where this works, where roads get built, schools get roofs, clinics get medicine, and the accounts are published, citizens will see something they have never seen before: a government that delivers because it is close enough to hear them and accountable enough to fear them. In districts where it fails, where the money disappears, the projects stall, and the accounts are blank, citizens will know exactly who failed, because the mayor’s name is on the ballot and the audit is on the website. This is how governance evolves in stable democracies. You empower the unit that already exists, let it prove its competence, and let the people decide what follows. If a district can educate its children, heal its sick, and pave its roads better than a distant capital can, the argument makes itself. Pakistan has spent decades concentrating power in a few hands and complaining about the results. Whether or not new provinces are created, the answer begins in the same place: with the districts that already exist. Let them prove what better governance looks like. Amend Article 140A. Give the district its money, its term, and its election. The people deserve better than promises that dissolve with a signature. They deserve a government that earns its authority by delivering results, starting where they live.

Pakistan laid the foundation for a NATO-style alliance among Muslim nations as Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif signed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement on August 7, 2026. The agreement represents a powerful recognition of Pakistan’s growing strategic importance.   The other two signatories included Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammad bin Salman, and Türkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who, along with Sharif, gathered at Al-Safa Palace in Mecca. In a joint statement, these countries announced that the agreement is “guided by the longstanding historical ties among the three states, based on the enduring bonds of brotherhood and Islamic solidarity that unite them, and building upon their shared strategic interests and longstanding defence cooperation.” The agreement asserts a commitment to treat an armed attack against any one of the three countries as an attack against all three.   The historic trilateral defence agreement was held at the Mecca Al-Mukarramah Summit for Joint Defence. It was also attended by Pakistan’s Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) and Chief of the Army Staff Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir, Defence Minister Khawaja Asif, and Deputy PM and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar. The foreign and defence ministers of Turkiye and Saudi Arabia were also in attendance. While the Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan described the agreement’s terms as technically comparable to NATO’s Article 5, it is pertinent to note that the pact is not equivalent to NATO. Its precise operational mechanisms and institutional framework are yet to be developed. Both Pakistan and Turkish officials have, however, reinforced that the agreement is not directed against any particular country. It is also not designed to replace any existing alliance or strategic relationship, and this particularly holds for Türkiye, which is already a member of NATO. That said, the Mecca agreement is merely a defensive arrangement. It is crucial to make this distinction because these countries are not preparing for war. Instead, they are attempting to make collective security more credible. Simply put, the goal is to protect each other from outside threats. This is where Pakistan serves as the main pillar of the arrangement. Pakistan has earned its seat at the table owing to the evolving strategic position under Sharif and Munir. Throughout his tenure, Sharif has strengthened Pakistan’s diplomatic relationships not only with Saudi Arabia and Türkiye, but also with other regional powers. Munir, at the same time, oversaw Pakistan’s most significant military conflict in recent years, prompting the country’s expanding role in regional security diplomacy. Together, they bring credible diplomacy and military strength. Pakistan did not emerge as a catalyst for the agreement overnight. The foundations of the Mecca agreement were laid by Sharif and Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman in Riyadh roughly a year earlier. On September 17, 2025, they signed the Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The agreement declared that aggression against either country would be considered aggression against both. Building upon a nearly eight-decade-long relationship, the two countries committed to strengthening the defence alliance and mutual deterrence. That pact was a crucial achievement for Sharif’s government. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have often described their relationship as strategic and deeply rooted in shared interests. Although Pakistan’s military personnel have trained and worked alongside their Saudi counterparts for decades, Sharif’s diplomacy has transformed the relationship into a more structured partnership covering defence, investment, politics, and regional diplomacy. The September agreement essentially laid the foundation for the trilateral defence framework, now strengthening Pakistan-Saudi longstanding ties by bringing Türkiye into the alliance. Sharif does not treat Pakistan’s relationships as isolated bilateral partnerships. He refuses to choose a single ally and maintains strong ties with multiple powers. Be it Saudi Arabia, Türkiye, China, Iran, or the US, each serves different strategic interests for Pakistan. This gives Islamabad greater flexibility and independence in its foreign policy, without becoming overly dependent on any single country. The flexibility paid off in 2026 when the Iran crisis forced Pakistan into one of the most challenging diplomatic balancing acts. Pakistan is Iran’s neighbour, but it also has ties with Saudi Arabia and Türkiye. Iran shares a long border with Pakistan and longstanding economic, political, and cultural ties. A regional war involving Iran thus constituted a direct threat to Pakistan. Islamabad could have chosen to shelter behind its borders and wait for the crisis to pass; however, it chose to influence its trajectory. Sharif spoke directly with regional leaders, whereas Munir directed the security framework of the mediation initiative. On April 9, the Prime Minister’s Office stated Sharif and Munir reviewed Pakistan’s peace efforts and expressed satisfaction with the positive de-escalation achieved at that stage. The two also reiterated Pakistan’s commitment to support the parties in securing a negotiated settlement. On April 25, Sharif discussed the regional crisis and Pakistan’s diplomatic efforts with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. Prime Minister’s Office later reported that Pezeshkian extended his gratitude to Sharif, Munir, and Deputy Minister Ishaq Dar for their pivotal roles in fostering peace. A month later, the Iranian President once more reiterated his appreciation for Sharif and Munir for their efforts to bring peace to the region. This was a turning point for Sharif. He shifted Pakistan’s foreign policy from simply reacting to regional crises to actively steering their outcomes. As Sharif drew the diplomatic map, Munir gave it a military backbone. The evolution became especially evident in May 2025. The clashes between Pakistan and India transpired as the most serious direct military crisis between the two nations in decades. Following the April 22 Pahalgam attack that left 26 dead, India launched airstrikes across Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Pakistan retaliated with Operation Bynyan-ul-Marsoos, which led to both sides agreeing to a ceasefire on May 10. It became a defining moment for Munir. Pakistan demonstrated the potential of its armed forces to conduct sophisticated operations under extreme pressure. It also proved that its military apparatus could impose high costs on a much larger military. That is the cornerstone of credible deterrence for Islamabad. As for Munir, the Pakistan-India conflict redefined

The development of decentralized finance represents a material reconfiguration of financial intermediation rather than a peripheral experiment in virtual assets. DeFi enables trading, lending, borrowing, liquidity provision and asset management through blockchain based smart contracts, with continuous availability, programmable execution, global accessibility and reduced dependence on conventional intermediaries. The FATF records total value locked at USD 86.644 billion in 2026, approximately 85 percent above the 2023 level, while institutional investors, virtual asset service providers and regulated entities are increasingly committing capital to DeFi arrangements. This track suggests that DeFi will not simply compete with traditional finance, but will progressively intersect with it through tokenized assets, settlement, payments, liquidity and market infrastructure. The policy significance of that convergence lies in the need to preserve innovation without permitting functional substitutes for regulated finance to escape equivalent safeguards. Traditional finance provides legal accountability, prudential discipline, customer identification and institutional channels for enforcement, while DeFi contributes automation, composability, transparency of public ledger transactions, broader access and rapid settlement. The future architecture is therefore likely to be hybrid: regulated institutions will use decentralized infrastructure where it produces efficiency, whereas supervisors will require comparable financial integrity outcomes whenever equivalent financial functions are performed. FATF, the Financial Stability Board, IOSCO and the IMF converge on a technology neutral and function oriented conception under which substance, activity, control and risk prevail over labels or technological form. The July 2026 FATF Targeted Report is consequently best understood as an implementation instrument that updates the 2021 Guidance in light of DeFi’s expansion. Its scope is to identify emerging money laundering, terrorist financing and proliferation financing risks, clarify when the FATF Standards apply. It also provide practical tools for identification, regulation, supervision and investigation, develop criteria for identifying controllers or persons exercising sufficient influence, and recommend measures for public and private actors. The report is expressly non-binding, but its analytical significance is substantial because it translates Recommendation 15 into a functional supervisory methodology for a market whose legal form, governance and territorial nexus are frequently indeterminate. The defining characteristics of DeFi create both utility and vulnerability. Similarly, smart contract automation removes many conventional execution functions, open source and composable architecture permit rapid replication and interaction among protocols, algorithmic market mechanisms automate liquidity, pricing and liquidation, pseudonymous liquidity provision permits participation without conventional identification, permissionless access may eliminate customer due diligence, and reliance on oracles imports external data into automated decisions. These characteristics permit rapid and complex movement of value but also allow illicit proceeds to be layered through liquidity pools, decentralized exchanges, bridges, swaps and multiple chains before supervisory or enforcement systems can react. The regulatory fragmentation, weak compliance, cyber vulnerabilities and diminishing dependence upon regulated entry and exit points further aggravate supervisory difficulty. The applicable legal framework begins with technological neutrality. The recommendation 15 applies where a natural or legal person, as a business, conducts or actively facilitates activities falling within the VASP definition. The software itself is not regulated merely because it executes a financial function, but persons exercising control or sufficient influence over a DeFi arrangement may fall within the regulatory perimeter. FATF differentiates centralized arrangements with identifiable controllers, centralized arrangements in which control exists but controllers are difficult to identify, and truly decentralized arrangements in which no person maintains control or sufficient influence. The first two categories fall within the Standards, the third falls outside direct application, although it remains subject to alternative risk mitigation through adjacent regulated actors. The principal implementation deficit is therefore institutional rather than conceptual. FATF’s 2026 survey found that only 26 of 142 responding jurisdictions had assessed DeFi risks, 132 had not identified qualifying DeFi arrangements operating in their territory, only four had implemented licensing or registration requirements, and only two had licensed or registered such arrangements. The resulting supervisory gap facilitates regulatory arbitrage and demonstrates why national authorities must integrate DeFi into national, sectoral or virtual asset risk assessments, calibrated to materiality, domestic exposure, cross border activity, governance structures and actual financial crime threats. The financial crime typologies identified by FATF demonstrate that DeFi risk is not confined to speculative misconduct. The fraudsters have used purported DeFi structures to misrepresent liquidity and divert investor assets, professional money laundering networks fragment funds across wallets and then use decentralized exchanges, bridges, mixers, swaps and chain hopping to obscure provenance, ransomware groups and hackers use DeFi immediately after compromise to convert and disperse proceeds, and proliferation financing actors have exploited governance weaknesses, oracles, bridges and limited compliance environments. The policy concern is intensified by speed: automated movement can complete layering before authorities, intermediaries or analytics providers can identify the event, establish attribution and initiate restraint. The decisive supervisory question is the identification of control or sufficient influence. FATF treats control as the practical ability to determine or materially influence key operations, service delivery or economic benefits. The relevant indicators include authority to modify or pause smart contracts, alter protocol parameters, control oracles, administer treasury assets, determine participation, appoint key actors, receive material fee flows, control governance votes, operate public interfaces, manage corporate entities, determine development priorities, control essential infrastructure, or direct branding and communications. No single indicator is conclusive. Additionally, authorities should combine public blockchain evidence, governance records, audits, service provider information, financial intelligence and investigative material, and should assess economic reality rather than formal claims of decentralization. The assessment of control must remain continuous because governance can migrate from a company or foundation to a decentralized autonomous organization without relinquishing substantive authority. The concentrated governance tokens, delegated voting blocs, special proposal rights, veto powers, administrative keys, clustered wallets and continuing receipt of protocol revenues may disclose retained control. On the contrary, a genuinely decentralized arrangement, after independent assessment, falls outside direct FATF obligations because no accountable person can be identified. That conclusion does not equate to absence of risk. The authorities should instead influence stablecoin issuers, regulated VASPs, financial institutions and controlled application interfaces, whereas encouraging digital identity, embedded customer due diligence and blockchain analytics within genuinely decentralized environments. The licensing and

By Asma Rahmat, Final Year Law Student, SLC, Superior University and Muhammad Ameer Hamza, Final Year Law Student, SLC, Superior University   The legal profession has long been regarded as one of the most respected and tradition-bound institutions in society, founded on human intellect, ethical judgment, and the pursuit of justice. Yet, like every other profession, it is now experiencing the profound impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Across the globe, AI is transforming industries by automating routine tasks, enhancing productivity, and improving decision-making. The legal sector is no exception. While countries with advanced legal systems have already begun integrating AI into legal practice and judicial administration, Pakistan is only beginning to explore its potential. The challenge before us is not whether AI will become part of the legal profession, but whether we are prepared to embrace this technological revolution while preserving the fundamental values of justice, fairness, and the rule of law. Artificial Intelligence has the ability to process vast amounts of information within seconds, making it an invaluable tool for legal professionals. Today, AI-powered software can conduct legal research, review contracts, summarize lengthy case files, identify relevant judicial precedents, and even assist in drafting legal documents. These are tasks that traditionally consumed hours or even days of a lawyer’s time. By automating repetitive and time-consuming work, AI enables lawyers to focus on the more complex aspects of their profession, including legal strategy, courtroom advocacy, negotiation, and client counseling. Rather than replacing legal professionals, AI has the potential to become a reliable assistant that enhances both efficiency and accuracy. For Pakistan, where the judicial system continues to struggle with delays and an ever-growing backlog of cases, the responsible use of AI could bring much-needed reform. Thousands of litigants wait years for the resolution of their disputes, often because courts are overburdened and administrative processes remain largely manual. AI can assist in organizing digital records, managing court schedules, classifying legal documents, and simplifying legal research for judges and lawyers alike. These improvements could significantly reduce delays, improve case management, and make the justice system more efficient without compromising judicial independence. Importantly, AI should support judicial decision-making rather than replace it, as the final responsibility for interpreting the law must always remain with judges. Beyond improving efficiency, AI also offers an opportunity to strengthen access to justice. A significant portion of Pakistan’s population cannot afford legal representation or lacks access to basic legal information. AI-powered legal assistance platforms, particularly those available in Urdu and regional languages, could provide citizens with preliminary guidance on their legal rights, court procedures, and available remedies. Such tools would not replace qualified lawyers but could empower individuals by helping them understand the legal system before seeking professional assistance. In a country where legal awareness remains limited, technology can become a powerful means of promoting legal literacy and strengthening public confidence in the justice system. The emergence of AI is equally significant for legal education. Law students now have access to intelligent research tools that can summarize judgments, explain complex legal principles, compare international legal systems, and assist in legal writing. These technologies can make legal education more interactive and research-oriented. However, they also present a challenge. Students must avoid becoming overly dependent on AI-generated content, as legal education is ultimately designed to develop analytical reasoning, critical thinking, and independent judgment. Future lawyers must learn not only how to use AI responsibly but also how to question its outputs, verify legal authorities, and apply legal principles thoughtfully. Despite its many advantages, Artificial Intelligence raises several legal and ethical concerns that cannot be ignored. AI systems are not infallible. They may generate inaccurate information, misinterpret legal authorities, or reflect biases contained within the data on which they were trained. A lawyer who relies solely on AI without verifying its results risks providing incorrect legal advice or presenting flawed arguments before the court. Furthermore, the use of AI raises important concerns regarding client confidentiality and data protection. Lawyers have a professional and ethical obligation to protect sensitive client information, and any use of AI must ensure that confidential data is handled securely. These concerns highlight the importance of developing ethical guidelines governing AI’s use within the legal profession. Pakistan currently lacks a comprehensive legal framework specifically regulating Artificial Intelligence. While existing laws address cybercrime and certain aspects of electronic transactions, they do not adequately address issues such as AI accountability, transparency, liability, algorithmic bias, or the protection of personal data in AI-assisted legal services. As AI becomes more prevalent, policymakers must establish a clear regulatory framework that encourages technological innovation while safeguarding constitutional rights, including privacy, equality before the law, and the right to due process. Such regulation will be essential to ensuring that AI serves society without undermining public trust in legal institutions. Perhaps the greatest misconception surrounding AI is the belief that it will eventually replace lawyers. In reality, the legal profession depends upon qualities that no machine can fully replicate. Lawyers do not merely apply legal rules; they exercise judgment, interpret complex factual situations, negotiate settlements, understand human emotions, and advocate persuasively before courts. Similarly, judges must balance competing rights, interpret legislation in light of constitutional principles, and deliver reasoned decisions based on justice and equity. These responsibilities require wisdom, experience, empathy, and moral reasoning—qualities that remain uniquely human. AI can provide information and support, but it cannot replace the conscience, ethical responsibility, and professional judgment that define the legal profession. The future of the legal profession in Pakistan therefore lies in collaboration rather than competition between humans and technology. Law schools should introduce courses on Artificial Intelligence, legal technology, and digital ethics to prepare future lawyers for an increasingly technology-driven profession. Bar councils and regulatory authorities should establish professional standards governing the ethical use of AI in legal practice, while the judiciary should continue investing in digital infrastructure to improve the administration of justice. At the same time, legal professionals must embrace lifelong learning so they can adapt to technological advancements without compromising the integrity

Pakistan’s banking sector is experiencing a fast pace digital transformation, which includes inception of new digital banks as well as digitalization of the banking services, like Raast, Roshan Digital Accounts etc. Nevertheless, this digitalization sometimes causes technology mistakes / errors in the banking systems as well. One such issue, though to a little extent, is the matter of mistakenly credited amounts to the customers’ accounts, due to system glitches. And unluckily, it is rare that the customers, who are beneficiaries of such mistaken credits, ever bother to intimate the banks about it or return the mistakenly credited amounts. The recovery of such amounts is though legally possible, however, since it is civil cause action, falling within the jurisdiction of civil courts, therefore, it becomes cumbersome for the banks to recover such amounts, easily and speedily. Needless to mention that the subject recovery does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Banking Courts and hence, speedy trial / summary procedure trial is not available for this kind of recovery. In addition, it is also difficult in these cases to have the support of the law enforcement agencies, due to some legal framework’s problems. Luckily, a learned Judge of the Lahore High Court Lahore has recently passed a remarkable judgement on the subject matter, which will support the banks, in such matters. The judgement is regarding a case, where a bank’s system mistakenly credited a significant amount to one of its customers, who utilized a major portion of the amount . The bank pursued the customer and he gave a cheque for the amount involved. The cheque was later bounced, due to insufficient funds in the account and the bank then lodged FIR against him under Section 489-F. He was arrested and his bail was refused by the lower Court, against which he approached the High Court. The High Court observed that the amount received by customer was not meant to be utilized by him, but it was to be retained and preserved by him for return back to the bank. The Honourable Court further observed that the customer was supposed and required to inform the sender/bank regarding the error and make arrangements for its return to the owner/bank. Furthermore, the Honourable Court observed that as soon as the customer became in a position to exercise his control over the property, the property stood entrusted to him impliedly, but he instead of returning the same to its owner/bank, withdrew significant amount and embezzled the same, as such offence punishable under Section 406 of PPC was fully attracted against him. This case will become a precedent that if a bank customer receives mistakenly credited amount in his account and utilizes it, then it will be an offence of Breach of Trust, under Section 406 of Pakistan Penal Code. The Judgement is reported as PLJ 2025 Cr. C 797 LHC.