The implementation of the clauses related to PEMRA's May 21 notification has been halted. Notices have been issued to PEMRA, the Ministry of Information, and others by the Sindh High Court, requiring a response by June 6. Advocate Abdul Moiz Jaffery argued that PEMRA is not authorized to issue such directives to channels.
He maintained in court that under the guise of this restriction, PEMRA attempted to impose constraints on the judiciary. Deciding which proceedings to cover and which judicial actions to restrict is within the judiciary's prerogative.
The Chief Justice of the Sindh High Court remarked that court reporters should also demonstrate responsibility in their reporting. It is also true that certain remarks and observations, if misrepresented, can create a negative perception of the judiciary.
The court adjourned further hearings of the case until June 6.
PEMRA Notification Banning Broadcast of Court Proceedings Challenged
The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) notification banning the broadcast of court proceedings has been challenged in the Lahore High Court.
Advocate Samra Malik challenged PEMRA's May 21 notification in the Lahore High Court, naming PEMRA, the federal government, and the Secretary of Information as respondents.
The petitioner argued that the May 21 notification issued by PEMRA is illegal and violates Articles 19 and 19A of the Constitution.
The petition requested that the court nullify the PEMRA notification and suspend it until a final decision on the petition is made.
It is noteworthy that journalistic organizations had rejected PEMRA's notification banning court reporting the previous day. The Press Association of the Supreme Court and the Islamabad High Court Journalists Association dismissed the notification, stating that it goes against press freedom and an independent judiciary.
The organizations emphasized in a joint statement that the Constitution of Pakistan grants the right to freedom of expression and access to information, and PEMRA does not have the authority to impose a ban on reporting judicial proceedings. They declared the notification a blatant violation of Articles 19 and 19A of the Constitution and demanded its withdrawal. The journalistic bodies warned that if PEMRA did not retract the notification, they would challenge it in court.
Two days earlier, PEMRA had imposed a ban on broadcasting news or tickers related to sub judice court cases.
In its statement, PEMRA directed all news, current affairs, and regional language TV channels to refrain from airing news or tickers about ongoing court cases and not to report on written court orders.
The statement further advised against broadcasting any commentary, opinion, or recommendations regarding the potential outcomes of cases under trial in courts or tribunals.
However, the notification stated that TV channels could report on cases being heard live.
Posts
0 Comments