Delay in Pemra Amends Ord withdrawal challenged
ISLAMABAD – The People’s Democracy Institute of the Shaheed Bhutto Foundation filed a constitutional petition on Wednesday in the Supreme Court saying that the public announcement by General Pervez Musharraf on June 9 to withdraw the June 4 amendments to the PEMRA Ordinance had still not been implemented and it was a mere a public relations exercise aimed at buying time and not an honest declaration of intent.
“The June 4 amendments that still held the field be declared unconstitutional,” it said.
The petition filed by former Senator Farhatullah Babar said that General Pervez Musharraf had during meeting with a representatives delegation of the Pakistan Broadcasters Association (PBCA) on June 9 announced to withdraw the June 4 curbs but no official notification has been issued to this effect despite passage of four days.
“It has raised questions whether the said announcement by General Pervez Musharraf was a mere public relations exercise and aimed at buying time without the intention to actually withdraw the impugned Ordinance.”
He said that the respondents be directed to state whether the impugned Ordinance has actually been withdrawn and if not it may be declared unconstitutional and ultar vires of the fundament rights.
The petition filed under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution has named Secretaries Parliamentary Affairs, Law and Justice, Information and chairman PEMRA as respondents.
He said that the curbs imposed on June 4 amounted to superseding the parliament and the Mediation Committee of the Parliament set up under Articles 70 and 71 of the Constitution and were contempt of the parliament.
“The draconian provisions from the PEMRA Ordinance 2002 had been removed by the Mediation Committee of the Parliament but were reintroduced through back door on June 4,” he said.
He said that the curbs imposed on June 4 and the restraining orders on live broadcasts were discriminatory as the state run PTV continues to show live the rallies of the ruling coalition and General Pervez Musharraf. This was in violation of the Article 25 of the Constitution which guarantees equality of all before the law.
The impugned ordinance was an effort to foist authoritarianism and stifle the media during the election year.
He said that important political decisions such as General Pervez Musharaf’s bid to seek re-election from the present Assemblies, queering the pitch in general elections by keeping the mainstream political leaders out of the arena, retention of uniform and overt and covert manipulations of elections are bound to be commented upon most fiercely by an independent media and that was the reason that new unconstitutional curbs were imposed on it.
He said that the impugned Ordinance was promulgated in violation of the Rules of Business under which the cabinet should have considered it but it was not done because the real authority was skeptical that the cabinet would not endorse the draconian provisions in it.
The new curbs authorises the state’s electronic media regulator PEMRA to confiscate equipment, seal the premises of the TV channels or cancel a channel’s license without referring the matter first to a Council of Complaints as envisaged in the legislation that was in force before the impugned ordinance. The Council of Complaints had been done away with and all powers vested in an individual namely the Chairman PEMRA.
He said that the impugned Ordinance is not only against several provisions of the Constitution but it is also in violation of several international covenants including Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of the Human Rights, Article 14 of the International Convent on civil and political rights guaranteeing right to fair trial and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1976.
It was also against Principle 1 of The Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, adopted by UN in 1996.
Source: Nation
Date:6/14/2007
” 
” 
” 
” 
