SC never rules about live broadcast of hearing

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has never given ruling that live broadcast of hearings was media’s right however the apex court always spoke for the freedom of media.

Additional Attorney General Aamir Rehman argued on Monday while opposing Justice Qazi Faez Isa's plea for live broadcast of his review proceedings before a 10-member SC bench.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa's filed an application seeking the apex court permission to allow live TV coverage of the proceedings of his review petition against the majority judgment that had referred the matter of his family’s properties to the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) for inquiry.

A 10-member larger bench comprising Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Maqbool Baqar, Justice Manzoor Ahmed Malik, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed and Justice Aminuddin Khan heard the review petition seeking removal of paragraphs 2 to 11 of the June 19, 2020 verdict.

On June 19, 2020, seven judges of a bench quashed a presidential reference against Justice Isa but also ordered the FBR to conduct an inquiry into the judge’s family members’ foreign assets and submit a report to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC).

During the course of proceedings, Additional Attorney General questioned the maintainability of application of Justice Isa and argued that the court could not decide such matters while hearing the review petition. Article 184/3 could not be applied in the review case, he added.

He said that no new position could be taken in the review cases.

He said that live coverage was the right of the media and not any individual. No media house had requested for permission for live broadcast of the court proceedings, he added.

The AAG asked did freedom of expression mean live broadcast?

Citing the example of hearings via video link, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said that technology had aided the court in many matters and helped to create ease.

Justice Umar Ata Bandial said that Justice Faez Isa mentioned the decisions of foreign courts.

The AAG said that it was the stance of the government that live telecast was not a judicial concern but an administrative matter of the SC.

Justice Bandial said it was not judicial matter but also a policy issue and same could only be decided in full court meeting on the administrative side.

The AAG said that there was a difference between live coverage of court proceedings and parliamentary proceedings. Debate in parliament was general and technical in court, he added.

He said that the language used in court proceedings was not understandable for commons.

Justice Mansoor said that there was nothing secret in court proceedings. The Supreme Court was the court of the people of this country, he added.

He asked if a person sitting in Gwadar wanted to witness the court proceedings, how could he be stopped?

The AAG said that several times in-camera hearings had been held.

Justice Mansoor said that the federal government should not tell the court what to do as live broadcasts were the prerogative of the court, not the federal government.

Justice Muneeb said if the government did not have the authority to tell the court, then no one had the right to ask. The hearing was still being held in open court, he added.

He said that there were currently ten judges in the court and six others were not present. He asked how to order live broadcast without consulting with other judges?

The AAG said that there were technical difficulties at every forum.

Later, hearing of the case was adjourned till March 17.