PTI chief seeks contempt proceeding against PEMRA

Imran says PEMRA flouted LHC orders by threatening TV channels of dire consequences if they broadcast his speeches

LAHORE:

Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan has urged the Lahore High Court (LHC) to initiaite contempt proceedings against the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) for disobeying a court order suspending a ban on broadcasting his interviews, speeches and press talks.

Imran had challenged PEMRA's prohibition in the Lahore High Court (LHC), and on March 9, LHC's Justice Shams Mahmood Mirza had suspended PEMRA's prohibition order.

However, the former prime minister alleges that the order has not been complied with, and that TV channels are not airing his speeches because the respondents – PEMRA Chairman Saleem Baig and Director Operations Muhammad Tahir, along with other PEMRA officials – have threatened them with dire consequences if they do so.

Read more: PEMRA bans airing of Imran Khan's speeches

On Saturday, Imran filed a contempt plea in the LHC through Barrister Muhammad Ahmad Pansota, arguing that the respondents have willfully flouted the judgment and are in violation of the court's order.

Pansota contended that the respondents' actions are contemptuous, illegal, "ultra vires" the law and the Constitution. He further argued that the respondents' actions are contrary to Article 10-A of the Constitution, and are therefore illegal, without jurisdiction, against Imran Khan's fundamental rights, and of no legal effect.

He contended that the respondents' actions have unfairly and unjustly treated the PTI chaimran and violated his constitutional right to be treated equally before the law in light of Article 25 of the Constitution.

He further argued that the acts amount to clear disobedience and ridicule the authority of the LHC, lowering the esteem of the court. As such, Pansota contended that the respondents are liable to be punished for contempt of court as prescribed by the law.

If the respondents are not punished for contempt of court, Pansota argued that the process of administration of justice could be undercut, and that the writ of the court would be flaunted.