Internship Report of Muhammad Zayd Mustafa, a student at Brooklyn Technical High School, New York- U.S.A, who completed a short internship with Abrar Hasan & Co.- Advocates & Legal Consultants (www.ahcolaw.com), during his trip to Pakistan.
Throughout this report not only will I be explaining or enumerating the numerous things that I learned throughout my experience, but I will also be comparing my observations with the aspects of American law that I am aware of. I hope that this report does justice to the true value of my internship.
On my first day as an internee at “Abrar Hasan & Co.- Advocates & Legal Consultants,” the first place that I visited along with Advocate Emad-ul-Hasan was the Anti-corruption court, and we were there for one of the many cases currently on-going at AHC. The case involved an issue of customs, so while in the car heading to the court, Mr. Hasan explained to me that there are three levels to the customs courts, the highest being the High Court, and also told me that the High Court does not listen to factual issues but rather only legal issues. Upon an inquiry I was also informed that provincial courts are autonomous till the High Court; the only higher court being the Supreme Court. This aspect of law in Pakistan I found to be exactly similar to the system in the US. Over there state courts are autonomous up till the Appeals courts, after which only the Supreme Court can change the decision that is upheld. However one difference I discovered between the system here from the US system, is that here both provincial and federal cases are tried in all courts. In the US, each state has its own court system with their own court rooms, and each states court system is completely separate from all other court systems in the country (with the exception of the Supreme Court).
Unfortunately upon reaching the Anit-corruption court we discovered that the judge was absent, and that the trial had been moved to another date in September. We thus returned to Mr. Hasan’s office near the High Court, where I was shown how lawyers manage their clients, court room dates, and other workload. I was impressed with the level of organization and use of excel sheets to list and record everything that had been done and had to be done in the future, giving me ideas on how to organize myself as well. I also found the concept of recording all correspondence with clients in a word document to be quite effective and useful. We also discussed other important aspects of a lawyers daily life, such as the importance of a lawyer’s office’s location. Throughout my internship we saved several hours due to having an office near the High Court; hours which otherwise would have been wasted waiting inside the High Court for our number, which often would never even be called.
Due to my knowledge of how the system worked in the US, I asked Mr. Hasan about the differences between the Civil and Criminal courts. In the Civil system, I was informed there are three levels; district, high, and then supreme. Similarly in the Criminal system I was informed there are again three levels; session, high, and then supreme. This aspect of law in Pakistan I again found to be similar to that of the system in the US. In the US, civil and criminal cases each initially go through a lower court, after which they can be appealed in the appeals courts, (which are divided into thirteen districts), and then may find their way to the Supreme Court. Another similar aspect of these two systems is that both the Pakistani and American court systems have specialized courts, such as banking courts, customs courts, tax courts, etc. However I noticed there to be far more of such courts in Pakistan than in the US.
Later on that day we discussed-in great detail-Constitutional Petition # ….. While discussing this petition I learned about the West Pakistan Shops & Establishment Ordinance of 1969, which was established for the regulation of commercial shops. I also learned that shops with more than ten workers must be registered with this ordinance. We further discussed the Workers Welfare Fund Ordinance of 1971, which stated that any establishment with a taxable income exceeding 5 Lakh rupees must give 5% of its income as a “fee.”
The Finance Act of 2008, I learned, amended the Workers Welfare Fund Ordinance to include all establishments under West Pakistan Shops and Establishments Ordinance of 1969.
This caused quite an uproar and led to a constitutional petition against this amendment, which argued that with such an amendment, they could only change taxes, and argued that what the WWFO charged was not a tax, but a “fee.” However the High Court Larger Bench (with 3 Justices) said that what the WWFO charges IS indeed a tax, as it requires establishments to pay up without any services in return, making it a tax and not a fee.
Now with the passage of the 18th Amendment in 2010, the powers of the WWF Ordinance were given to the provinces. This prompted another petition that argued that the WWF Ordinance no longer had power. Mr. Hasan told me two points that he intended to make to argue that this Ordinance was not applicable to law firms. The first point was that the WPSEO was not applicable to law firms because law firms are not shops or commercial establishments, and were never even given a notice to register under the WPSEO. His second point was that the WPSEO requires an establishment to have more than ten workers in order for it to be required to register under this ordinance, and his argument was that lawyers are not workers.
Mr. Hasan then showed me how a case folder is organized. The petition itself goes on top, followed by the urgent application, and finally comes the injunction. These three things are of course accompanied by several other important pieces of paperwork.
The final few things that I learned on my first day as an intern included how simultaneous petitions with a common point relate. We discussed one specific example, and how in this example one case was shot down as it had not explored all other possible solutions other than the courts. Following this all related cases were also put on hold, until that specific alternate route was tried, and subsequently failed. Now that all alternative routes had indeed been tried, the cases once more turned to the courts.
This concept, that all alternative possible solutions much be tried before a case should be brought to the courts, is yet another similarity between the American and Pakistani justice systems. In America this concept is called the “Exhaustion of Remedies Doctrine.” This doctrine states that all possible solutions should be explored before a case is brought to the courts.
On my second day as an intern we planned and prepared for CPD………
To prove that lawyers are not workers we looked for and discussed several different definitions of a “worker” or a “workman.” To do this we looked in several different books and past cases. One example of such a definition we found was “any person employed in any industrial or commercial establishment to do any skilled or unskilled, manual or clerical work for hire or reward.”
I also learned how to properly form an argument to present to the judge, and this in this specific example included looking for further definitions beyond that of a “worker,” such as “commercial establishment” and “industrial establishment.” I learned that even if there is the slightest bit of doubt as to what something means, in law, we should always look for, include, and cite the definitions of such words or phrases in our arguments. This ensures that no room is left for false interpretation.
While preparing for this petition we also discussed how instead of repeating another lawyers argument on a specific matter, we should just “adopt” it, and if we wish to, add our own points on to their argument. We also discussed another point that we could make; that exceptions to the term “worker” do exist for some professions, so lawyers should also be an exception.
The final things I learned this day (it was a short one) was the difference between a client and a customer. This came up when we were reading yet another definition of a worker, which included the phrase customer. We discovered that a client is someone who hires a professional for advice or help in their field. This is different from a customer, who simple purchases an item, meaning lawyers do not have customers, but clients, and are therefore not workers.
On my third day as an intern we started off by preparing another set of documents. It was during this process that I learned the process of skeletal drafting and then drafting a document. Skeletal drafting refers to the creation of simply an outline of a document, that will later be filled with the specific information that the document is being created for. Drafting refers to this process of filling in the blank spaces. A skeletal draft can be created simply by using an old, similar document and deleting all unrelated information.
Following another inquiry from me, we then got into a discussion on how a suit proceeds, and we even discussed how it could be amended to be more time efficient.
……. hearing only take place when the judges have specific questions or concerns. After all, all the evidence and testimony is already presented to the judges, and they can make their ruling based on that.
I however, do feel that the hearing does effect the judges final judgment, and should be done away with. Instead, we should adopt a process similar to the one in the US. In the US, when a case is being brought before the judge(s), it receives a set date and time, on which it is guaranteed your case will be heard. When the hearing begins, both sides are given an equal amount of time to present their cases, and their is a time limit on how long one person can talk. No such limits exist in the Pakistani system. If we were to adopt this sort of a system, we could eliminate all the time wasted waiting for your case to be called, often when it doesn’t even get called, and it would also save time, as cases wouldn’t just keep getting delayed and postponed again and again. It would also create a much more organized environment, as now lawyers wouldn’t just be milling about the courtrooms. In the US, where such a system is employed, when a case is heard only parties with an interest in the case are present in the courtroom, leading to a far more civilized and professional environment.
The system we have right now leads to the piling up of several cases, making management very difficult for a lawyer.
On this day I learned a few other tidbits of information, such as the fact that constitutional petitions and a few other types of cases go straight to the Appeals Courts and bypass the lower courts.
Today was my fourth day as an intern, and I got to experience a criminal trial. Instantly I noticed numerous differences between the US and Pakistani systems. For one, the Pakistani court room was far more informal. Lawyers were simply sitting about, people were waiting outside for their case to come up, and the judge often interrupted the proceedings in unorthodox fashions. I also noticed that several different cases were taking place on the same day. This is different from the system in the US, where once all the paperwork is done, one case is assigned several days where the judge only oversees said case until it is done. Such a case may go on for one to three days, or in certain cases, even a few weeks. This system again creates a system of organization. People are aware when exactly their trial will take place, and lawyers can thus manage their time much more easily.
I also noticed that trials go on for much longer in the US than in Pakistan. In the US a trial goes into every tiny detail of the facts, and a witness is typically on the stand for at least several hours.
Today I also learned about how a lawyer applies to get a vacation. They have to seek a general adjournment, by listing all the days they will be out, and all the cases they are managing, so that none of their cases takes place when they are out. I also learned about an execution application, which is submitted so that a courts order is acted upon.
Overall my internship (with still two days left) has taught me a lot about the Pakistani justice system, and I am certain, from what I have seen, that we can work to better our already in place system. It is not a bad system, just a slow one, and this can be fixed quite easily.