By: Fatima
This is not an abstract discussion about governance failure or a distant policy concern. It is my lived reality and it shows how falsification of civil registration records, followed by institutional delay and inaction, can compromise a woman’s legal identity and leave her struggling for justice.
Although I had been legally separated from my husband for several years, I discovered that his nephew had been registered as his son, with my name recorded as the child’s mother. I neither consented to this registration nor had any biological relationship with the child. According to the records available to me, this false parentage information was subsequently used in obtaining a Computerized National Identity Card and Pakistani passport documentation for the child.
This was not simply an incorrect entry on a birth certificate. Motherhood carries legal, family and social consequences. Recording a woman as the mother of a child without her knowledge or consent can affect her legal identity and raises serious questions about the integrity of the state’s civil registration and identity systems.
The documentary material and witness statements I submitted to the authorities indicated the involvement of the child’s father, his brother and a Secretary of the Neighbourhood Council, Sadda-Kurram, in the disputed registration. I also raised the serious question of whether the Secretary concerned had any lawful jurisdiction over the area where the registration was processed. These matters required a proper and impartial investigation to establish responsibility according to law.
I formally reported the matter and submitted written statements confirming my biological status and clearly stating that the document had been issued without my knowledge or consent. I approached the Assistant Director of Local Government, Kurram District, and following the departmental process, the false certificate was cancelled.
I subsequently sought an inquiry into how such a certificate had been issued. The Local Government Department conducted an inquiry but the measures communicated to me were limited to written warnings and minor disciplinary action. To this day, I do not know whether even those recommendations were implemented. I also formally requested the inquiry findings and the complete record on the basis of which the departmental letter was issued. Neither the requested record nor a substantive response was provided to me.
The matter also had to be pursued through the courts. After the legal proceedings, it was established that the child was not mine. Following that determination, the child was removed from my official record. This finally corrected the false relationship that I had challenged from the beginning.
But correction of my record is not the same as accountability.
Despite the cancellation of the certificate, the court proceedings establishing that the child was not mine and the eventual removal of the child from my record, to the best of my knowledge no meaningful action has been taken against any person in connection with the alleged fraudulent registration. The question of who was responsible for creating, facilitating, verifying or processing that registration therefore remains unanswered.
The role of NADRA also requires attention. The disputed civil registration did not remain within a local government office. It entered the national identity system and according to the documentation available to me, was relied upon for further identity and passport documentation. Despite repeated follow-ups, I have not received meaningful cooperation or sufficient clarity from NADRA about how this information entered the identity system, what verification took place and what corrective or preventive measures followed.
This is particularly concerning because NADRA is central to safeguarding the integrity of Pakistan’s identity records. When an underlying civil registration document is found to be false or invalid, there should be an effective mechanism to trace every connected record, correct it and determine how the information passed through the system.
The chronology of this case raises a serious question that requires a clear answer. My NIC was amended in 2018 to reflect my father’s name and at the time of its issuance, my official identity record reflected my status accordingly. The Form-B issued in 2020 recorded my three children. How, then, did an 18-year-old person appear in my record as a fourth son in 2024 when my official status was that of a single mother? Such a significant addition should not have been possible without an application, supporting documents, verification and authorization. It is therefore essential to establish when and how this person was linked to my identity, what documents were used, who initiated and verified the process and how the system allowed it despite my existing official record.
The court proceedings subsequently established that the child was not mine, while a departmental inquiry and supporting evidence are already available to the authorities. In these circumstances, continued delay in determining responsibility is difficult to justify. The FIA should take the matter to its logical conclusion by examining the available evidence and identifying everyone responsible for creating, facilitating, verifying or using the false record. Wherever wrongdoing is established, appropriate legal action should follow.
A case of this seriousness should neither move indefinitely from one desk or officer to another nor be closed without a proper investigation, meaningful engagement with the complainant and a reasoned outcome. Correcting my record was necessary, but it cannot substitute for accountability. When the underlying facts have already been examined through judicial and departmental processes, further delay only weakens public confidence in the institutions entrusted with protecting the integrity of citizens’ identities.
This is not a demand to declare anyone guilty without due process. That determination belongs to the competent authorities. But where evidence establishes wrongdoing, appropriate action should follow according to law. An investigation that ends without clarity, or a case that remains pending indefinitely, cannot provide confidence to an affected citizen.
The case also exposes a wider problem of institutional coordination. Local Government manages foundational civil registration, NADRA maintains national identity information, passport authorities rely on identity records and the FIA investigates relevant alleged offences. When information passes through several government systems, responsibility cannot disappear between institutional boundaries.
As a woman holding a Master’s degree, I am particularly conscious of the wider implications. Documentation concerning marriage, divorce, motherhood and family relationships is not merely administrative paperwork. It can affect inheritance, guardianship, family registration, citizenship rights, travel, access to services, as well as a woman’s dignity and legal identity.
The fact that disputed parentage information could pass through different layers of official documentation also raises questions about verification mechanisms, internal controls and inter-departmental coordination. Whether such failures result from negligence, procedural weaknesses or misconduct should be determined through a credible investigation rather than left unanswered.
There are practical reforms that can reduce these risks. Parentage registration should require stronger verification and appropriate authentication of the persons being recorded as parents. Civil registration and identity systems should maintain secure digital audit trails showing who created, verified, modified and approved critical entries. When a false foundational document is cancelled, all connected records should automatically be identified and reviewed.
There should also be reasonable timelines for investigating alleged falsification of public records, stronger coordination among Local Government, NADRA, passport authorities and investigative agencies, gender-sensitive training for documentation officials, independent audits and an effective complaint or ombudsperson mechanism for citizens whose cases remain unresolved.
Pakistan’s civil registration and identity systems underpin citizenship, child protection, women’s rights, public administration and national security. Their credibility depends not only on correcting inaccurate records after they are discovered but also on determining how such records entered the system and ensuring accountability where wrongdoing is established.
I have fulfilled my legal and civic responsibility. I reported the matter, submitted evidence and written statements, approached the concerned departments, sought an inquiry, followed up with NADRA, approached the FIA and pursued the matter through the legal process. Eventually, the false certificate was cancelled, the court process established that the child was not mine and the child was removed from my record.
Yet the central accountability question remains unanswered: how did this happen, who was responsible and what action will be taken where responsibility is established?
My purpose in raising this publicly is not to prejudge anyone or to attack state institutions. It is to ask those institutions to fulfil the responsibilities entrusted to them and to use this case as an opportunity to strengthen a system on which every citizen depends.
No woman should have to spend years proving that a child officially recorded against her name is not hers. And once that truth has been established, she should not have to spend further years asking why it happened and whether anyone will be held accountable.
Justice in matters of legal identity requires more than correction. It requires transparency, accountability, dignity and the rule of law.
