SC questions role of agencies, media

Says upholding Constitution is everyone’s duty; asks govt what was the cost of the sit-in

ISLAMABAD: The top court has observed that the people of Pakistan are entitled to know the loss of life and property caused by the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan protest in Islamabad and the ensuing government response.

In its order, the Supreme court has directed the ministries of interior and defence “to provide information on the law enforcement personnel who lost their lives [or] were injured, the number of innocent bystanders or members of the public who lost their lives [or] were injured, the particulars of protesters who lost their lives [or] were injured, and the particulars of public and private property destroyed and damaged by protesters with their approximate value”.

The court order also takes note that some TV channels acted irresponsibly, saying, “When violence is perpetrated against the State and destruction of public and private property is broadcast without condemnation of the violence, or by justifying it, not only is a platform provided to advocate [protesters’] cause but [it] also encourages them to resort to violence.”

The court has also issued a notice to the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) with the direction to exercise extreme vigilance of the electronic media to ensure that it strictly complies with the provisions of the ordinance, failing which they should be proceeded against in accordance with law.

PEMRA is further directed to submit a comprehensive report with regard to the broadcast of the protest by all electronic media channels. "Since we have made observations, which some in the media may consider adverse to their financial interest, those who have a different understanding of the Constitution, the Ordinance, and the laws of Pakistan may file concise statements.”



The order also directs the Ministry of Information to send a copy of the order to all electronic media houses as well as newspapers and magazines published in Pakistan for information and compliance.

The bench has observed that everyone is bound to uphold the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, including every media anchor, politician, and aalim.

“Those who do not do so do not serve Pakistan. The people of Pakistan through their chosen representatives gave themselves the Constitution, and wherein it has been stipulated that loyalty to the state is the basic duty of every citizen. Obedience to the Constitution and law is the inviolable obligation of every citizen wherever he may be and of every other person in Pakistan,” says the order.

It adds, "Those carrying out violent acts, advocating or propagating violence, destroying or damaging property, abusing, or resorting to hate speech also violate the injunctions of Islam.”

The order also takes issue with the fact that parts of its earlier orders – which referred to verses from the Holy Quran and the sayings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) – were apparently not disseminated properly.

A believer cannot condone, let alone perpetuate violence, the order says, adding that it is a matter of concern that those killing, maiming and injuring, and those destroying or damaging property and those advocating or justifying violence, purportedly in the name of Islam, are attempting to denigrate it.



The order further says that it is a matter of grave concern when inflammatory, provocative or abusive statements are broadcast as they have the effect of fanning the flames.

“There are also those who are pushing out hate propaganda. One wonders whether the violence that results and continues to express itself is a direct consequence of such broadcasts. Freedom of speech and expression and independence of the media is cherished by the people of Pakistan and guaranteed under the Constitution, but there is no place in the public discourse to propagate the commission of an offence or to incite people to resort to violence. Broadcasts cannot encourage violence, extremism, militancy, or hatred,” the order said.

The court expresses concern that some people are propagating views which malign the armed forces by projecting them as something wholly apart from the executive and not subject to the Constitution. “In doing so they are clearly violating Article 5 of the Constitution. Just as judges take an oath which includes the statement, ‘I will preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’.”

Earlier on Thursday, during the hearing of the suo motu case regarding the blockade of roads by the protesters, the top court expressed dismay over the role of the media during the nearly three-week-long sit-in by a religious group at Islamabad’s Faizabad Interchange.

The court again raised questions over the role of intelligence agencies by saying that they are not held accountable.

A divisional bench of the court, headed by Justice Mushir Alam, warned media outlets to abide by the law and not telecast speeches which fuelled hate, violence and sectarian unrest in the country, saying it would otherwise summon the owners of private TV channels.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa, a member of the bench, questioned why action should not be taken against TV channels provoking violence, adding that nobody was ready to talk about the teachings of Islam which spread through the good deeds of people and not the sword. He lamented that everything in Pakistan is politicised.

Faizabad crackdown handed over to Rangers

Justice Alam questioned who provided arms and ammunition to the protesters. “How was it possible for protesters to carry explosives into the federal capital,” he questioned. “If you can’t protect the capital, how will you secure the rest of the country?”

Justice Isa added who would the bear the loss of properties. He said it is mandatory for all citizens to be loyal to the state under Article 5 of the constitution.

Meanwhile, the bench also expressed dissatisfaction over the role and performance of the intelligence agencies during this protest.

“There is no accountability of the agencies,” Justice Isa remarked, noting that intelligence agencies had also pointed out the negative role of private TV channels during the sit-in.

The bench also wondered why agencies did not provide sensitive information in their reports. The bench had previously set guidelines for submission of any classified information.

Later, Deputy Attorney General Sohail Mahmood told the bench that the state suffered a Rs146 million loss due to the protest.

The bench went on to observe that senior representatives of intelligence agencies must be present in the courtroom.

“Why is the Inter-Services Intelligence silent on this matter?” questioned Justice Isa.

While noting that the military should not be maligned, the judge reminded that it is a part of the government and asked the DAG to read the oath of judges and generals.