Wow... dear goodness.I got an email from a prosecutor from a non-western Country; I thought it was a joke or false threat. Turns out it was legit, and I was going to be tried in abstentia: I ended up going to the trial at my own expense (because I did not want to live with the dishonor) and got tried pretty much by a court that doesn't respect any form of Common Law; the only way out of getting sentenced was apologizing and admitting fault: something that I explained away as being necessary, because if one is to have one's name impugned by a foreign court who takes jurisdiction upon itself against one (because in their "law" you can be subject to the jurisdiction of the victims domicile, and the court found the crime was committed on their soil anyway); then obviously I must make a practical concession in how I conduct myself, not because I was morally wrong; but because I was ignorant of their peculiar (to me) system of law. These qualifications were rather offensive to them; but eventually we came to a mutual understanding that I did not consider myself under their law; because I did not believe as they did.
After a few exchanges about whether they could accept an admission of fault that did not impugn one's moral character- we agreed to blame my ignorance of their ways (which I was pretty much coerced to say something good about; I did not purger myself, I simply didn't state the shadow of the my description of their social arrangement.)
I feel bad about it; but it was not a proper court of record.
South Africa has a good relationship with Pakistan, so I did not feel so insecure upon my departure. But I was not tried by a secular court, and their government (I mean their proper judiciary) had no influence over the proceedings (I had wanted to rely on them a few times during my proceedings, because that is the system I had researched before going).
I can't remember all the details well, the court was not unlawfully convened, it was endorsed by their secular system; it was just a separate and independent institution that was still part of the judiciary.
[I was very angry, because I had worked out based on their rights guaranteed in their law that I had the tools to get a fair trial, or at least shield myself from any miscarriage of justice, but you can't assert those rights in the type of proceeding I was in, and if you apply to the proper courts for protection of those rights, they will not protect those rights against the proceedings of the type of court I was in (even though as the law stands written: those rights were stated to be upheld by the highest & supreme judicial authority);- which would of been the basis of a follow up case I had wanted to prosecute to deeply shame their country for what I considered to be blatant institutional dishonesty- but I was advised by diplomats that it would not be good for cross-national relations between our countries. (basically I wanted to tarnish their reputation for possessing the rule of Law in order to reclaim my dignity: I wouldn't of felt so bad, it was just that all the expert lawyers I had questioned said the rule of law was pretty much a given in Pakistan (with regards to wheels of justice (I know a lot can be said about the axis of power)).)]
[by the way: I don't mean substantive law, they were largely rights regarding evidence and procedure in the consideration of evidence; although that can be said to inform the right to a fair trial (but that's a common law way of thinking- I just want to make the point: I was not frustrated because I did not understand their law; but because they did not allow their law to administered as it was written on their codes and books: something I could of taken them to task for (although only in a civil capacity))].
I'm so sorry you had to go through all that court systems like that can be quite merciless and unfair, from what I've heard.