Judges’ observations

Mr Kaira’s statement is an attempt to turn the judiciary and the media against one another, says Advocate Awais.


Rana Tanveer March 03, 2013
The federal minister had said on February 24 that judges should bar media from publishing or airing their remarks during judicial hearings.

Some lawyers on Sunday said a statement made recently by Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Qamar Zaman Kaira rejected the freedom of press and tended to lower the dignity of courts.

The federal minister had said on February 24 that judges should bar media from publishing or airing their remarks during judicial hearings. Kaira, apprehended, that tickers on news channels about judges’ remarks could damage the election campaigns of certain political parties. He had suggested that only court verdicts should be published.

When approached by The Express Tribune for their analysis, some jurists were of the view that the minister’s statement was an irresponsible one. They said it seemed to suggest that the government wanted to tell the judges what they should not be saying.

Advocate Ahmed Awais said Mr Kaira’s statement was an attempt to turn the judiciary and the media against one another.

He said both the media and the judiciary would reject any move to curb their independence. He said the judges were always impartial, regardless of what political parties make of their remarks or judgments. He said the Pakistan Peoples Party had made a habit of criticising the courts. He said an independent judiciary and free media were the institutions that work the most for the rule of law and democracy.

*****


Love marriages are still poorly tolerated. The courts continue to uphold them but the families, in most cases, keep fighting them.

Many such families make a point of seeking dissolution of these marriages. They also seek panchayats to get decisions in their favour. Some do not even think twice before killing their daughters and sisters in the name of honour.

At the Lahore High Court last week, a couple who had married without the families’ approval was attacked by the bride’s family.

On February 27, Shireen Shamim and her husband Imran Akram, both residents of Gujrat, were leaving the court of Justice Yawar Ali when they were attacked by Shamim’s relatives.

They were severely beaten and security officials had to intervene. Earlier, Akram had filed a habeas corpus petition stating that he had married Shamim who wanted to live with him but her parents were not letting her.

He prayed the court that she be rescued from illegal detention by her family.

When Justice Yawar Ali asked the woman, she replied that she wanted to be with her husband. The judge then, ordered that she be allowed to go with her husband. That did not stop Shamim’s family from beating the couple as they stepped out of the courtroom.

*****


Service matters of the armed forces personnel remain out of purview of high courts. Last week the Lahore High Court refused to entertain a petition against a policy of the army.

Naeem Ahmed, a Retired Subedars’ Union representative, had filed a petition seeking retirement benefits similar to the retired commissioned officers.

The registrar’s office objected and said the petition was not maintainable in that it questioned the policy of the army.

The petition was then fixed as an objection case before Justice Nasir Saeed Sheikh. The judge upheld the objection.

The petitioner had submitted that the retired subedars were being discriminated against. He said the subedars were not even given a house allowance after retirement. He said they were also denied the facility of free education for their children, unlike the commissioned officers who get all these facilities.



Published in The Express Tribune, March 4th, 2013.

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