- IHC says media can responsibly report on sub judice matters
- SCBA criticizes Pemra, calls for restraint against media
ISLAMABAD: On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued show cause notices to 34 television channels, demanding explanations for why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them for airing remarks from two lawmakers criticizing the judiciary.
“Reporting, broadcasting, and telecasting the press conference also constitute contempt. Therefore, show cause notices will be issued to all the television channels through the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra). The channels must explain why proceedings should not be initiated against them for committing contempt of court,” stated an order dictated by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa.
Chief Justice Isa was leading a three-judge SC bench addressing the court-initiated contempt case against Senator Faisal Vawda and MNA Mustafa Kamal, who criticized the judiciary at separate press conferences at the National Press Club (NPC) in Islamabad.
In the last hearing, the Supreme Court held that those broadcasting or publishing material constituting contempt might also be committing contempt of court.
The notices were issued after Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan argued that television channels must be mindful of their duty under the constitution not to allow contemptuous statements against the judiciary on their platforms.
Pemra Criticized
Supreme Court Bar Association President Shahzad Shaukat, while agreeing that any assertions against the judiciary are unacceptable, suggested restraint in actions against the media. He expressed concern that Pemra was trying to suppress court reporting instead of blocking anti-judiciary comments from those ignorant of the law but intent on causing unrest.
Represented by senior counsel Dr. Farogh Nasim, MNA Mustafa Kamal of the MQM-P has already issued an unconditional apology for his remarks, claiming he referred to pending Riba (usury) cases. His counsel requested the Supreme Court to withdraw the notice against him. The SC noted that Kamal had sought the court’s mercy and forgiveness.
Meanwhile, Advocate Moiz Ahmed, representing Faisal Vawda, requested additional time to review his statement, indicating he might file a fresh reply within a week.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court criticized Pemra’s notification restricting television channels from reporting court proceedings. The court noted the inconsistency of allowing contemptuous press conferences to be broadcast while banning court reporting.
Pemra should not obstruct court proceedings, warned the CJP, implying further actions might be taken. Justice Irfan Sadaat Khan highlighted that Faisal Vawda’s press conference specifically targeted two superior court judges.
While not included in the written order, the court suggested Mustafa Kamal hold a press conference to express remorse for his contemptuous remarks against the judiciary. The Supreme Court will resume the contempt proceedings on June 28.
Sub Judice Matters
Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Aamer Farooq observed on Wednesday that the media could report sub judice matters responsibly and requested final arguments on petitions challenging the ban on court reporting.
The Islamabad High Court Journalists Association and others had filed petitions against Pemra’s notification banning coverage of sub judice matters.
During the hearing, Justice Farooq remarked that responsible reporting on sub judice matters is permissible and the regulator could issue advisories against irresponsible reporting. Pemra’s legal counsel submitted a reply to the petitions.
Justice Farooq inquired from Additional Attorney General Barrister Munawar Iqbal Duggal if the federal government was involved. Duggal responded that the notification was issued by Pemra, and the federal government was not involved.
Counsel for the petitioners, Barrister Umar Ijaz Gillani, argued that Pemra misinterpreted relevant rules and the SC judgment to impose a blanket ban on coverage of pending cases.
