Justice Qazi Faez Isa argued before the Supreme Court (SC) that the federal government has “destroyed” the media and is controlling it in an attempt to shape the public narrative, insinuating that he was one of the targets of this brand of federal propaganda.
A 10-member larger bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial was hearing the case on Monday, wherein Justice Isa had moved an application seeking live telecast of court proceedings of the review petition in his case.
“I am being publicly maligned. Propaganda is being spread against me through controlled media,” said Justice Isa. He claimed that the government had “destroyed” the media and would now set its sights on social media platforms such as YouTube.
Justice Bandial stated that the application itself was not limited to judicial matters, but related to those of policy, and a live TV broadcast of the proceeding could only be possible after consultation with the administration of the court.
To this, Justice Isa remarked that his life has been under a microscope for the last two years. While the government did not hesitate to go through his personal matters with a fine-tooth comb, he maintained, they refuse to allow his proceedings to be public.
He said that if live coverage was allowed in his case then it would be clear for all to see what is “just and true”.
Additional Attorney General (AAG) Amir Rehman prayed before the court that the federal government declared Justice Faiz Isa’s petition inadmissible
“Review requests cannot be pleased to be broadcasted live,” the AAG added. “[Section] 184/3 cannot be applied in the review case.”
He added that no new position can be taken in the review case whereas the law mentions open court hearings and not media coverage. He stressed that while the court may uphold the freedom of the press, they have not been given the right to be allowed live coverage of any court case.
Live broadcast, the AAG added, was the right of the media and not any individual’s, adding that no media house had requested permission to broadcast live from the court.
On the other hand, bench member Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said that technology has helped the court in many matters Hearing on the video link was also by the virtue of technology.
“The federal government should not tell us what to do,” the apex court judge said, adding that live broadcasts are the prerogative of the court, not the federal government.
The AAG retorted that the government’s position was not that the matter of judicial, but that the management of the SC should make the decision. To this, Justice Muneeb Akhtar remarked that the government is therein not telling the court what to do, adding that the hearing is still being held in open court.
“There is a difference between live coverage of court proceedings and parliamentary proceedings,” Rehman pleaded and added that debate in Parliament is general and in courts, it is technical whereas the language used in court proceedings is not common.
Justice Shah stated that SC is the court of the people and that they need to keep up with the times as they live in a global village.
The apex court adjourned the hearing till March 17.
Last week, the apex court had allowed Justice Isa to argue his case regarding a review petition against the June 19 order in which the apex court quashed a presidential reference filed against him.
Justice Isa had argued his application for live coverage of his case proceedings asked the apex bench why the court is not using the technology if it is available.
“If we do it for you then we should do it for everyone,” Justice Umar Ata Bandial had told the SC judge. Justice Bandial had also said that there are logistic and practical concerns about the live telecast of court proceedings. “It is a policy and an administrative matter rather than a judicial matter,” the apex judge had added.
Justice Isa had tried to establish how he was defamed by leaking selective information related to the presidential reference.
He had further maintained that he was here not for himself but also for the future of Pakistan. Justice Isa had also highlighted how independent media men are facing harassment in the recent past.
However, Justice Bandial had said that the court does not commit to issues that are not before it. “If anyone has grievances then he should approach the court which will surely adjudicate,” Justice Bandial had said.
Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik had also told Justice Isa that he should not be emotional; otherwise, his attention may be diverted from his case.
CJP needs to shut this man up. Its not his job to make such statements. Something is not ok with his brain.
Pakistan’s new Imran government is backed by the army, and it is thanks to the army that Imran Khan was able to win the elections and become Prime Minister. Going against the government in this case means going against the army. In Pakistan, however, going against the army means making life difficult for oneself. Justice Isa is going through the same thing. In Pakistan, the media can’t reveal anything without the army’s permission. Almost everything in Pakistan operates according to the army’s wishes, and everyone who defies the regime is killed. If it is clearly stated, ‘Pakistan is a country of the Pakistani Army’, ‘Not the Pakistan Army is of Pakistan’.