ISLAMABAD: The federal government on Monday raised objections on Justice Qazi Faez Isa’s application for live telecast of his review petition against the apex court judgment on a Presidential Reference, saying, “it is non-maintainable”.
A 10-member bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial comprising Justice Maqbool Baqar, Justice Manzoor Ahmed Malik, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed and Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan was hearing Justice Faez’s application for live telecast of his review petition against the Supreme Court judgment on a Presidential Reference.
Additional Attorney General (AAG) Amir Rehman argued that in the review petition, the issue of live telecast could not be examined, adding that the application in this regard could not be filed under Article 184(3) of Constitution, while there is no restriction in the law of hearing of case in the open court.
Citing the judgment of Justice Yahya Afridi, the AAG said that no new point could be raised in the review petition. He said that constitution and the law talk about open court hearing, but not live broadcast of proceedings.
He said that live broadcast is the right of media and not anyone else, adding that no media house has approached the apex court for live telecast of the proceedings of the review petition.
Justice Bandial remarked that according to Justice Isa, there are curbs on media freedom.
AAG Rehman replied that the courts have always supported press freedom. He said the petitioner has raised the issue of a fair and transparent trial.
According to various judgments of the apex court, the AAG added, the petitioners have full right to defend their cases in the open court. He quoted the judgment of the late Justice Naseem Hassan Shah which says the media is not completely free as there are also some restrictions on it.
Justice Mansoor Ali said that it is the age of science and technology, and that’s the reason the court while sitting at the principal seat hears the lawyers’ arguments from Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) through video links.
He said it is the sole jurisdiction of the apex court whether it allows live broadcast of the case or not, adding the federal government cannot instruct the apex court as what it should and what it shouldn’t do. He asked the AAG that his job is to assist the court only.
“My stance is that it is not the judicial but administrative power of Supreme Court,” the AAG contended.
To this, Justice Muneeb Akhtar said if the federal government does not have power to tell the court about live coverage, no one else can do that.
The AAG said that Supreme Court has the power to allow or disallow live broadcast of proceedings.
Justice Mansoor remarked that the world has become a global village, adding that person sitting in Gwadar has the right to witness live telecast of Supreme Court hearings. He said there are many citizens who could not come to the Supreme Court due to financial constraint.
“Instead of adopting latest technology, we want to burry our heads in sand like ostrich,” he added.
He said that there is nothing confidential that people should not know, adding that “if a judge misbehaves in the court, it should also be shown to people. People have right to freely express their opinion, as there is no point to hide anything and everything should be made public”.
The AAG said there are several instances in which the apex court had heard the cases in chambers, adding in Brazil, they say that judge chambers’ discussion should also be telecast.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2021