Media group challenges IHC’s May 9 order

PBA also to contest order placing curbs on special Ramazan transmissions

ISLAMABAD : Filing an intra-court appeal (ICA) that is likely to be taken up by a division bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday (today), a media group has challenged the IHC’s recent verdict regarding enforcement of certain guidelines on all TV channels.

The IHC single-judge bench, headed by Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui, on May 9 ordered all TV channels to stop programnes like ‘Neelam Ghar’ which, according to the court, suggest lottery or gambling even for distributing Haj/Umrah tickets as well as programmes which appear like ‘circus shows’.



Requesting the court to declare the order as void, the ARY TV media group on Monday filed an ICA through its counsel Chaudhry Faisal Hussain. The Pakistan Broadcasters Association (PBA) is also going to challenge the IHC verdict today [Tuesday].

Ali Zafar advocate has prepared draft of the PBA’s appeal which contends that the court took over the role of a ‘controller’ of media content and programing on TV channels, which is not the role envisaged of any court under the Constitution and the law and hence the order is void and liable to be set aside.

The draft of the ICA, which is available with The Express Tribune, says the IHC has no jurisdiction under Article 199 to ban any programmes including entertainment programmes and advertisements, issue directions for programming and make censorship boards and committees for compliance.



It says the high court also cannot ban who can and cannot speak on religion, issue guidelines or direct the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) to issue guidelines regarding the programing and content of the programmes or their timings etc, or to issue the various directions and instructions to TV channels as contained in the impugned order.

“The finding whether or not a show is indecent or immoral or should or should not be shown is the matter of legislation and parliament is the true representative of the people.

“The court cannot impose its own sense of morality or decency or perceived values of Islam on the public as has been done in the impugned order,” it says.

The PBA’s petition claims that the IHC wrongly decided that all foreign advertisements, dramas and films, ‘Neelam Ghar’ type programmes, other foreign content, entertainment shows containing music etc and programmes inviting donations are violative of Article 19, Pemra law and the Code of Conduct.



“It is submitted that Article 19 provides that reasonable restrictions by law can be imposed upon the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, speech and press in the interests of decency, morality and for the glory of Islam [Similarly Pemra Ordinance and Code of Conduct reiterates the same].

The petition said under Article 19 it is only through law made by parliament that any restrictions can be imposed. The exercise of powers to impose restrictions by the high court under Article 19 is hence unconstitutional.

It says under Pemra Ordinance and Code of Conduct also the IHC has no jurisdiction to impose the restrictions/directions contained in the Impugned Order or direct Pemra to do so.

“In view of this there is no law under which the Hon’ble Single Judge could impose the restrictions or issue the directions contained in the impugned order. the impugned order is hence liable to be set aside being contrary to the Constitution and the law,” the petition says.