Pemra gag order on TV reporting of court proceedings challenged in HCs

Petitioners say new guidelines about court reporting violative of Article 19-A

LAHORE/ISLAMABAD:

A notification issued by the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA), restricting the media from broadcasting tickers and headlines of the court proceedings were challenged in the Lahore High Court (LHC) as well as Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday.

One petition was filed by Samra Malik in the LHC that had been fixed for hearing on Friday. The Press Association of Supreme Court and the Islamabad High Court Journalists Association filed a separate petition in the IHC.

Malik contended that the Pemra notification issued on May 21, constituted violation of the public’s right to information. The petition would be taken up by Justice Abid Aziz Shaikh for a hearing on Friday (today). She had made Pemra, federal government and the information secretary as parties.

Read more: PEMRA’s notification on court reporting challenged in LHC

Malik contended that the notification was in direct contravention of the Section 19-A of the Constitution and the Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which allowed “everyone’s right to seek, receive, and impart information through any media.

“PEMRA lacks the authority to issue such an order that stands against the democratic norms and violation of basic fundamental rights. The Islamic courts historically conducted proceedings in public, ensuring that the justice was not only done but also seen to be done,” said the petition.

In the IHC, the petition was filed through Barrister Umar Ejaz Gilani and Riyasat Ali Azad on behalf of the two representative organisations of Supreme Court and high court reporters. It made the information secretary and the Pemra chairman as parties to the petition.

Also read: Pemra directed to ensure ‘unbiased’ coverage

Pemra, through its amended notification on May 21 issued guidelines regarding court reporting. The petitioners contded that the notification was violative of the Article 19 and 19A of the Constitution in which a Supreme Court's judgment was misinterpreted.

The petitioners requested the court to quash the Pemra notification. They further requested the court to suspend the notification till the final decision of their petition.