“I swear by God that I will state the truth and conceal nothing from the court.”

There is an oath taken in Pakistani courtrooms, such as “I swear by Almighty Allah that I will state the truth and conceal nothing from the court,” that carries deep, significant meaning. It is not just a formality but reflects a commitment to absolute honesty before the law. The language of the oath emphasizes two distinct parts of responsibilities: to ‘state the truth’ and to ‘conceal nothing.’ The phrase ‘state the truth’ is very obvious, however, ‘conceal nothing’ is somewhat very deep. There are certain examples in life where, by just concealing something, you can sabotage the situation.

Stating the truth means that what the witness says must be factually accurate. However, a person could technically speak the truth while still being deceptive if they choose to withhold important facts. For example, a witness might truthfully say, ‘I saw the accused at the scene,’ but intentionally omit the fact that they also saw someone else committing the crime. By doing so, they are not telling a direct lie, but they are misguiding the court toward a false conclusion as they are not presenting the whole picture of the scene. This act of concealment, while not a lie in the literal sense, is actually a lie and deception.

Section 202 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 directly reinforces and formalizes the idea discussed earlier: that concealing the truth can be legally equivalent to lying when there is a duty to disclose information. The said section reveals, “Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, intentionally omits to give any information respecting that offence which he is legally bound to give, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.”

The key words here are “intentionally omits” and “legally bound to give”. This means that the law does not only punish direct lies or false statements; it also punishes the deliberate withholding of truth when someone has a legal obligation to inform the authorities.

This ties in directly with the courtroom oath, where the witness swears “to state the truth and conceal nothing from the court.” The legal principle behind Section 202 supports the need for this oath, because truthfulness in court includes both speaking honestly and disclosing all relevant information. If a person has knowledge of a crime or facts related to it, but chooses to stay silent or leaves out key details during testimony, they are violating the law, not just ethically but criminally as well.

That was the legal perspective, where omitting or concealing information is treated as equivalent to lying. However, similar behavior is often seen in social situations, where individuals hide crucial information and cause harm to others, sometimes unintentionally, by using phrases like “I’ll tell you later,” “You won’t understand right now,” or “It’s better to save this information for the future.” While it may be understandable in some cases, such as trying to avoid conflict or emotional distress, this approach is based solely on one person’s judgment. How can one truly assess another person’s capacity to understand or handle the truth? What seems disturbing or unnecessary to share from one perspective might, in fact, be vital to the other person’s life, decisions, or emotional well-being.

Moreover, people often say, “I didn’t lie to that person,” but the real question is: Did you tell the truth either? Did you withhold any information? If you deliberately hid something important, then that too is a form of lying. Many people excuse their behavior by saying they didn’t tell a lie, implying they haven’t done anything wrong. But honesty isn’t just about avoiding false statements; it’s also about being truthful in spirit. If someone knowingly leaves out critical information to mislead another person, even if every word they said was technically true, they are still intentionally creating a false impression. This is called a lie by omission.

For example, if you know something that would significantly affect another person’s decision or emotions, and you choose to hide it, you’re not being honest just because you didn’t speak a direct falsehood. In moral and relational contexts, just like in law, deliberate concealment can be just as damaging, deceptive, and ethically wrong as an outright lie.

To sum up, in many ethical, legal, and religious systems, including Islamic teachings, concealing the truth when one must disclose it is considered a serious wrongdoing. Moreover, concealing information under the guise of protection or timing can unintentionally become a form of betrayal, especially when that information could have influenced someone’s choices or changed the course of their life. Just as the inclusion of both ‘state the truth’ and ‘conceal nothing’ in the oath ensures a comprehensive commitment to honesty, relationships, whether personal, professional, or social, also thrive on transparency and trust. In both domains, withholding the truth can carry consequences as serious as speaking a lie.