ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC), Wednesday, remarked that there is no ban on court reporting; rather ban is on irresponsible court reporting.
A single bench of Chief Justice Aamer Farooq made the remarks while hearing a petition filed by the Press Association of Supreme Court (PAS) and Islamabad High Court Journalists Association (IHCJA).
President PAS Aqeel Afzal and President IHCJA Fiaz Mehmood have filed a petition and cited the chairman Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) and the Federation through the secretary Ministry of Information as respondents.
During the hearing, Justice Aamer said the problem is only with airing sensational tickers. The judge said there is no ban on court reporting. The media can report the court proceedings.
The additional attorney general was asked by the court if the federal government was involved in this matter. He replied that this matter is related to Pemra, not the federal government’s issue.
Barrister Umer Ijaz Gilani, representing the petitioners, informed that the law used by Pemra does not prohibit reporting of pending cases.
The hearing was adjourned until 11th June.
In their petition, they stated that through the impugned notifications, Pemra has imposed a blanket ban on the live reporting (known in media jargon as “tickers”) of statements in open court by the various actors of the justice system including judges, lawyers, parties and witnesses.
They added that by imposing a blackout on court proceedings without even consulting the judiciary, Pemra is effectively committing an assault on the independence of the judiciary, in addition to violating the public’s right of access to information, journalists’ of freedom of speech and litigants’ right to fair trial. “The notifications are also procedurally defective for reasons elaborated in the petition and thus liable to be set aside. Last but not the least, the notifications, which sound a death-knell for the profession of courtroom journalism, have jeopardised the right to livelihood of the members of the Petitioners’ organisations and amount to a violation of their rights under Article 18 of the Constitution,” added the petitioners.
The petitioner’s counsel informed the court that after the issuance of the impugned notifications, show-cause notices were issued to various licensees for allegedly continuing to provide live coverage of court proceedings. In the wake of the issuance of SCNs to Licensees, there is now an imminent threat to the livelihood of courtroom journalists. Many of these journalists have spent the first two decades of their careers covering the honourable courts; but now they are at the risk of being rendered redundant because of the media blackout being imposed on court proceedings.
Therefore, the petitioner’s counsel prayed that this court may declare that the impugned notifications are illegal and unconstitutional and set aside the same.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2024
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.