The Supreme Court, presiding over an enigmatic plea seeking the regulation of media freedom, has formulated nine inquiries to be answered by a senior lawyer and an Advocate on Record (AoR) via respective affidavits. These inquiries aim to elucidate who instructed and engaged them to file such a plea.
An order spanning seven pages was issued after the May 13 hearing, addressing a challenge by the Press Association of the Supreme Court (PAS) against the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) conducting “roving inquiries” and the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) issuing summons based on vague allegations of a purportedly explicit and malicious campaign against the superior judiciary and its judges.
The SC order directed AoR Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah and senior counsel Haider Waheed, under whose name the petition was filed, to clarify various aspects. These include identifying the drafter of the petition, the entity responsible for printing it, issuance of notices to respondents during filing, payment of fees, and evidence of communication with petitioners, among others.
Three out of the six petitioners disavowed the plea seeking media freedom regulation.
On April 2, the Supreme Court summoned the six petitioners who had initially filed the petition in 2022 but later sought to withdraw it due to inconsistencies. During the May 13 hearing, three petitioners denied involvement in filing the petition, attributing the discrepancies to misuse of their names. They contested the authenticity of their signatures on the power of attorney submitted by AoR Ahmed Nawaz Chaudhry.
Despite AoR Rifaqat Shah claiming engagement by the petitioners through Haider Waheed’s office, Mr. Waheed refuted this claim, stating no interaction with the petitioners except Advocate Qausain Faisal.
