Skip to Content
logologo
AI Incident Database
Open TwitterOpen RSS FeedOpen FacebookOpen LinkedInOpen GitHub
Open Menu
発見する
投稿する
  • ようこそAIIDへ
  • インシデントを発見
  • 空間ビュー
  • テーブル表示
  • リスト表示
  • 組織
  • 分類法
  • インシデントレポートを投稿
  • 投稿ランキング
  • ブログ
  • AIニュースダイジェスト
  • リスクチェックリスト
  • おまかせ表示
  • サインアップ
閉じる
発見する
投稿する
  • ようこそAIIDへ
  • インシデントを発見
  • 空間ビュー
  • テーブル表示
  • リスト表示
  • 組織
  • 分類法
  • インシデントレポートを投稿
  • 投稿ランキング
  • ブログ
  • AIニュースダイジェスト
  • リスクチェックリスト
  • おまかせ表示
  • サインアップ
閉じる

レポート 1637

関連インシデント

インシデント 1965 Report
Compromise of National Biometric ID Card System Leads to Reverification and Change of Status

Loading...
IHC accepts petition challenging jurisdiction of NADRA to impound CNIC of girl
nation.com.pk · 2021

ISLAMABAD - The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Friday accepted a petition challenging the jurisdiction of the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) to impound CNIC of a girl by purportedly adjudicating upon the question of her paternity.

A single bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice of IHC Justice Athar Minallah issued the verdict in a petition filed by a girl Urooj Tabani against NADRA’s decision of impounding her CNIC and excluding her from the family tree.

In the verdict, the IHC bench allowed the petition and declared the impugned orders and proceedings of NADRA as illegal, void, without lawful authority and jurisdiction. Justice Athar declared, “The Authority is not vested with the power and jurisdiction to, directly or indirectly, adjudicate upon or interfere with intricate contested family disputes, including paternity. In such eventualities a change in the particulars incorporated in a card issued under the Ordinance of 2000 shall be subject to a declaration by a competent court.”

He added, “The CNIC of the petitioner shall be restored and the change of paternity shall be subject to a declaration by a competent civil court. By disputing the paternity of the petitioner, the latter must have been exposed to unimaginable pain, agony and emotional distress as well as psychological trauma.”

Urooj filed her petition challenging the jurisdiction of the NADRA to impound her CNIC by purportedly adjudicating upon the question of her paternity. After hearing the parties, the same IHC bench directed the Authority by way of an interim relief vide order dated 11-10-2019 to unblock the CNIC of the petitioner.

She stated that the NADRA, instead of complying with this court’s order, issued a fresh CNIC showing some other person as the petitioner’s father. However, realising that this court had not passed such an order, the Authority unblocked and restored her original CNIC.

The counsel for the petitioner argued that the Authority could not have changed the paternity of the petitioner unless there had been a declaration to this effect by a competent court and adjudication of contentious and disputed questions of fact is outside the scope of the power and jurisdiction vested in the Authority.

The IHC bench observed in the verdict that the petitioner had unequivocally stated that she was prepared to take a DNA test so that the question of paternity is decisively settled. Similarly, the counsel for Yaqoob was asked that whether the latter was willing to accept the suggestion made by the petitioner. The counsel had sought time and on the next date of hearing Yaqoob did not consent to undergo the DNA test.

情報源を読む

リサーチ

  • “AIインシデント”の定義
  • “AIインシデントレスポンス”の定義
  • データベースのロードマップ
  • 関連研究
  • 全データベースのダウンロード

プロジェクトとコミュニティ

  • AIIDについて
  • コンタクトとフォロー
  • アプリと要約
  • エディタのためのガイド

インシデント

  • 全インシデントの一覧
  • フラグの立ったインシデント
  • 登録待ち一覧
  • クラスごとの表示
  • 分類法

2024 - AI Incident Database

  • 利用規約
  • プライバシーポリシー
  • Open twitterOpen githubOpen rssOpen facebookOpen linkedin
  • e1b50cd