warrant and the date of execution. While this period varies between the provinces and regions, it is consistently extremely short. In Punjab, prior to the lifting of the moratorium, the time between the issuance of a black warrant and the execution of a convict was between 14 to 21 days. However, ten days after the moratorium was lifted, an amendment was introduced in the High Court Rules and Orders as a result of which the time between the issuance of the warrant and the execution of the convict was decreased to a minimum of three days and a maximum of eight days. This unreasonably short timeframe places severe limits on the possibilities for resolving cases in which evidence of juvenility only arises post-conviction. "In our engagement with the public, we have observed that people generally do not consider juvenile offenders to be children. Unfortunately, most of our judges are simple reflections of this societal attitude.” - Iftikhar Mubarak, - Activist, Plan International c C O U RT S R E LY U P O N U N R E L I A B L E M E D I C A L T E S T I N G I N AG E D E T E R M I N AT I O N P RO C E E D I N G S On account of the distrust accorded by the judiciary to government records in age determination proceedings, courts commonly rely upon medical tests as determinative proof of age. Section 7 of the JJSO requires that in the event that a plea of juvenility is raised “the juvenile court shall record a finding after such an inquiry which shall include a medical report.” The most commonly used form of medical tests in Pakistan for the determination of age is an ossification test where the age is determined on the basis of using x-rays of bone density, conducted by a medical board comprising of three or more doctors established by the court for this purpose. Determination of age through medical tests such as the ossification tests does not offer conclusive proof of age. Problems with “testing” age through “medical” procedures have been thoroughly explored by doctors in the context of immigration controls in Europe: First, imaging of bones or teeth can never indicate precisely the chronological age of the individual. Images can only provide an estimate compared with images from control subjects, and within the very substantial range of normal development during adolescence. Methods such as ossification testing were not designed to assess disputed chronological age—they were prepared for medical use in diagnosing and monitoring disorders of growth. Second, the assessment of age should be undertaken through a comparative assessment of the image of the individual against standards of normality for the population from which the person originates. Such standards are simply not available for children and young people from many countries in Asia, Africa or the Middle East, and it is unsatisfactory to assess their images from the standards derived from Caucasian, European or North American children. Third, although superficially easy to do, radiography demands expert interpretation by experienced paediatricians, dentists or radiologists. Shafqat Hussain Versus President of Pakistan and others' Civil Petition No.1127 of 2015 63 Lahore High Court, Lahore Notification No. 402/Legis/H-D-4(HD). 24.12.2014 Medical, statistical, ethical and human rights considerations in the assessment of age in children and young people subject to immigration control, Aynsley-Green, T.J. Cole, H. Crawley, N. Lessof, L.R. 64 Boagi and R.M.M Wallace, Br Med Bull (2012) 102 (1): 17-42. 62 29 DEATH ROW’S CHILDREN