Ministers upset over ‘toothless’ press laws
ISLAMABAD- Some federal ministers have influenced the cabinet to keep government’s control on print media through restraining legislation and have termed the draft press laws, prepared by the Information Ministry with the consultation of newspaper representative bodies, as “toothless”. A ministerial source said that President Musharraf after being influenced by the ministers, who were seeking control on “unscrupulous” newspapers and tabloids, directed the Information Ministry to get back to the press bodies to redraft a “balanced” legislation.
The source said the cabinet was told by some ministers that the proposed press laws, if approved, would lead to an extreme of newspapers independence and where there would not be any government’s check. It was agreed that the present Press and Publication Ordinance was the other extreme where the government enjoyed unfettered powers to tame the print media. The ministers pressed the cabinet to defer the matter and get the draft laws reviewed to balance out the two extremes.
One of the federal ministers, according to an Information Ministry source, had even been lobbying, just before the cabinet meeting, in favour of giving “teeth” to the “toothless” draft press laws. The draft laws that were presented before the cabinet for approval include Press Council of Pakistan Ordinance 2002 (PCPO) and Press, Newspaper, News Agencies and Books Registration Ordinance 2002 (PNNABRO).
They were prepared by the government in consultation with the leading newspaper representative bodies- All Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS) and Council of Pakistan Newspaper Employees (CPNE). PNNABRO is recommended to repeal the Press and Publication Ordinance of 1963 and replace Registration of Printing Press Ordinance of 1988/1997, which authorised the government to take stringent action against any newspaper publication.
Though PNNABRO suggested minor penalties to check certain violations of the newspaper industry, there was no provision in the proposed law that would equip the government with the power of banning any publication. The second ordinance PCPO would facilitate the constitution of a press council of Pakistan which would redress the complaints of the readers/masses against anything published in the newspapers.
The objections by some ministers, according to the source, were pertaining to PNNABRO which according to the ministers merely provided for the registration of the presses, papers and books. No control of the government, it was said, was intended in the draft law. The proposed legislation, it was argued, did not envisage any provision of government’s “control” over press or papers. The prevailing situation in Pakistan, it was said, demand some effective and productive control mechanism to prevent print media from “blackmails” and “sensationalism” and to avoid undue press pressures.
The present press laws, that are sought to be replaced for being draconian, empowered the government to forfeit all copies of a book or paper which otherwise could have incited somebody to commit an offence; spread false rumours to cause public alarm; hit the idea of creation or sovereignty of Pakistan; brought hatred for a lawful government in Pakistan; excited feelings of hatred among people of Pakistan; damaged relations of Pakistan with a foreign country; and seduced any officer or soldier to renounce his allegiance to his duties.
The present laws also empower the district administration to have a search conducted at any place whereby sufficient suspicion of presence of such published material existed. Similarly, local administration authorities are empowered to seize not only the unauthorizedly published papers / books / newssheets etc. but also the presses whereby they were printed.
The proposed legislation, it was said would also deprive the government of its discretion to issue the declaration to any applicant. While there is discussion going on in the government circles to give the needed “teeth” to the proposed press laws, some saner elements in the government admit that there is no need for state’s control on print media. Rather, it is said that the government should protect the rights of the people and secure them from libellous publications through substantive laws instead of special laws.
It was reportedly also discussed in the cabinet that the libel or defamation suits filed in the country’s courts against the newspapers were not timely disposed of thus became redundant. The saner elements suggest that instead of keeping arm-twisting powers to tame the newspapers the government should streamline the firm implementation of defamation/libel laws.
Source: The News
Date:3/17/2002
” 
” 
” 
” 
” 
