LHC shuts down Facebook in Pakistan


Rana Tanveer May 19, 2010

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Wednesday ordered the temporary blocking of the Facebook website until the next hearing on May 31.

On the judge’s orders and in compliance with the orders of the Ministry of Information Technology and Telecommunications (MoIT), the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) directed all internet service providers to block Facebook till further orders. Both the petitioner Chaudhry Zulfiqar Ahmed and the PTA agreed to let the court make a decision after an initial hearing and a futile attempt to resolve the situation through mediation. Earlier, the petitioner had asked the court to order the PTA to immediately ban the use of Facebook in the country.

The popular social networking site, with 45 million users in Pakistan, has been the target of countrywide protests for hosting a caricature competition of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and for refusing to remove the page. As court proceedings began in Lahore, more than 50 emotionally-charged lawyers criticised PTA director Mudassir Hussain’s testimony regarding the impact of the site’s closure. Hussain said that it was impossible to block the website as it would hurt Pakistan’s economy, adding that the country could lose its internet facilities.

He said that the PTA had already blocked the link for the competition page since the evening of May 18. However contrary to his statement, lawyers presented in court a printout of the webpage taken after 10 pm on May 18, demonstrating that the webpage had not been blocked. Lawyers then proceeded to show the functioning page to the judge. Furthermore, Advocate Muhammad Azhar Siddique, chairman Judicial Activism Panel, argued before the court that Pakistani Muslims were ready to face any financial loss for the prevention of blasphemy against the Holy Prophet (pbuh). After initial proceedings, the court asked both parties to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution.

Hussain said while he was a Muslim, steps to close down Facebook would bring a bad name to Pakistan in the world. Neither party could agree and finally decided to leave the decision to the court. Ahmed filed the petition on behalf of the Islamic Lawyers Movement. “According to Article 2-A of the Constitution, which says no practice against religion can be allowed in the country, the competition was illegal,” he said. LHC Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry has also ordered Ahmed and others to assist the court regarding international laws in the present case. Hussain has also been asked to file a detailed report.

Published in the Express Tribune, May 20th, 2010.

Our Publications

COMMENTS (22)

Kiran | 10 years ago | Reply I am proud to be a Pakistani and thanks to LHC, I am even prouder that Pakistan was the only Muslim country to have taken such a step.I completely support the action taken against facebook.People who say that we haven't achieved anything out of this ban and similar crap, maybe they don't want to see what we have achieved.Firstly, the controversial page has been removed from facebook.Secondly, due to this ban,America and people responsible for this realised that we,Pakistanis, will not tolerate anything that is against our beloved Prophet S.A.W and they even apologised (which I think was what we wanted). Thirdly, by using facebook we were contributing to it becoming No.1 social networking site in the world and had Muslims all over the world stopped using facebook, we could have snatched the glory of being No.1 from it. Fourthly and most importantly, I feel content and satisfied that when I will be questioned about this at the day of judgement, I will not be unanswerable, I won't be ashamed and I will have an answer that yes, I played my part in protecting the dignity of my beloved Prophet S.A.W.
Bangash | 10 years ago | Reply A pointless ban of a few days which accomplished nothing. The courts in Pakistan are active in politics, not in adjudicating cases.
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ