Questioning Strategies: Employed the Most During Cross-Examinations in Pakistani Courts

Abstract

This research study aims to ascertain the questioning strategies employed the most during cross-examinations in Pakistani courts. A quantitative method, based on power dynamic as the conceptual framework, has been used to explore the research topic at hand. The data were collected through a questionnaire from a random sample of 300 law practitioners. They were quantitatively analyzed, using percentage, standard deviation, and ANOVA to explore their questioning strategies to deal with witnesses. The study found that "establishing fact" and "contradiction and inconsistency" are the most widely used questioning strategies. While "leading questions" and "emotional appeal" are the rarest strategies employed by Pakistani law practitioners during cross-examinations. The study has honestly reported the results with some recommendations, such as training law practitioners in using diverse questioning strategies and investigating linguistic power imbalance, among others, for future researchers.