In the pursuit of procedural justice and constitutional integrity, this essay seeks to expose the systemic injustices inherent in Pakistan’s e-challan regime – a system that, while cloaked in the rhetoric of modernization and efficiency, has evolved into a structure that misallocates liability, violates due process, and undermines both constitutional and Sharia principles of justice.
The e-challan system, operational across provinces such as Punjab and Sindh, was intended to automate traffic enforcement through surveillance cameras and digital ticketing. However, it functions on a deeply flawed presumption: that the registered owner of a vehicle is automatically the violator of any traffic infraction captured by a camera. This assumption, legally and morally unsound, has resulted in innocent citizens being penalized for offenses they did not commit. A father lending his motorcycle to his adult son may find himself fined and penalized because the system attributes the act to ownership rather than actual conduct. Such cases reveal a profound violation of the principle of personal culpability – a cornerstone of both Pakistan’s constitutional jurisprudence and Islamic legal philosophy.
The absence of due process further aggravates these injustices. There exists no transparent or accessible mechanism for citizens to challenge wrongful e-challans. Instead, individuals are often compelled to pay fines to avoid further penalties, including license suspension. This practice directly contravenes Article 10A of the Constitution, which guarantees every citizen the right to a fair trial and the opportunity to be heard. Furthermore, as highlighted by the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No. 227807/2018, the Punjab Safe City Authority’s e-challan regime lacked statutory authorization and cabinet approval, rendering its operations ultra vires and therefore unconstitutional.
From a constitutional perspective, the system infringes multiple rights. Article 4 – the right to be dealt with in accordance with law – is violated when fines are imposed without proof of personal wrongdoing. Article 10A’s due process guarantees are disregarded by the system’s automated procedures, and Article 25’s assurance of equality before law is undermined when liability is unevenly distributed between owners and drivers.
The Sharia perspective reinforces this constitutional critique. The Quranic injunction that “no bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another” (Surah Al-An’am 6:164, Surah Al-Isra 17:15) establishes a moral and legal principle that liability must be personal. Punishing one individual for another’s actions violates the fundamental Islamic concept of adl (justice). Moreover, Islamic jurisprudence demands both intent (niyyah) and act (fi’l) to establish culpability – conditions completely ignored in the current system, which automatically assigns guilt by ownership.
Evidentiary deficiencies further compound the issue. Instances of mismatched number plates, faulty image recognition, and unverifiable driver identities expose the technological fallibility of the e-challan system. Cameras capture vehicles, not drivers. In cases involving tinted windows, helmets, or unclear footage, identity remains indeterminate – yet penalties are imposed regardless. The system provides no procedural avenue for exculpatory evidence such as affidavits, CCTV footage, or witness statements, thereby denying citizens their right to contest false accusations.
Ethically, the e-challan regime represents a dangerous inversion of legal philosophy. It presumes guilt rather than innocence, turning ownership into a proxy for culpability. This reversal of burden of proof – a “presumption of guilt” – erodes the foundation of justice and sets a perilous precedent for administrative convenience superseding individual rights. Such mechanized governance may appear efficient, but it sacrifices human dignity and erodes public trust.
To restore legality and fairness, the Doctrine of Driver-Specific Accountability must be enshrined in law. No individual should be penalized unless it is proven that they were the driver at the time of violation. Similarly, the Mandate of Evidentiary Fidelity should require verifiable, driver-specific evidence for all penal actions, alongside the right to contest such evidence before an impartial authority. The presumption of innocence must be reinstated for registered owners unless complicity is proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Reform must begin with legislative clarity. New laws should define the limits of liability, establish procedural safeguards, and create an independent appeals tribunal for e-challan disputes. Commercial and shared vehicles should maintain driver logs or biometric verification systems to ensure accountability. Third-party audits of recognition software must be conducted to verify technological accuracy, and citizens should be educated about their rights and obligations within this digital enforcement framework.
The e-challan regime, in its current form, is a digital mirage of justice – efficient in appearance but hollow in substance. It punishes the innocent, protects the negligent, and undermines the principles of fairness upon which lawful governance depends. The absence of judicial oversight in its operation constitutes a grave constitutional breach, violating Articles 175, 199, and 10A of the Constitution. By bypassing judicial review, the system transforms the executive into both judge and executioner, dismantling the separation of powers that upholds the rule of law.
In the end, this is not merely a technical or administrative issue; it is a moral and constitutional reckoning. Laws exist to serve people – not to oppress them. The e-challan system must, therefore, be reformed in the spirit of justice, accountability, and compassion, ensuring that Pakistan’s pursuit of digital governance does not come at the expense of its constitutional soul.
