Pemra amendments still a threat
OUR uniformed president has agreed to withdraw the sweeping media curbs contained in the recent amendments to the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) Ordinance 2002. Apparently, he has linked the withdrawal of the draconian amendments to a code of conduct.
Press reports suggest that the code of conduct to regulate media business would be incorporated in the Pemra Ordinance. Reports also indicate that the Pakistan Broadcasters Association (PBA) has been told that the code of conduct must keep “national interests” in view.
So until the code of conduct is made public and amendments are withdrawn officially, the sword of Damocles will continue to hang over the media. It is difficult to believe that the government will agree to a code of conduct that does not suit it or that gives full freedom to the media. The government would be happier to see controlled freedom for TV channels and the press.
The government slapped the curbs on the media by making amendments to the Pemra Ordinance just two days before the National Assembly was to commence its budget session. This indicates that its intentions were mala fide. Through these curbs, the government made its dissatisfaction known to media organisations, especially to TV channels for their live coverage of recent events including those featuring Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and the bloodbath of May 12 in Karachi.
Although the present dispensation claims to be democratic and is never tired of taking credit for making the media free, ground realities point to something totally different if recent events are to be taken as yardsticks for the verification of the government’s claim. The message for journalists is loud and clear: the government will not let the media get too big for its boots for it would then impinge on its authority.
The implementation was suspended because of nationwide protest not only by journalists but also by political parties. The decision was taken following a meeting of the prime minister with officials of the PBA and the All Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS). A six-member committee, consisting of three members, one each from PBA, APNS and the Council of Pakistan Newspapers Editors (CPNE) and three senior government officials from the ministries of information and law will review the ordinance.
These fresh amendments empowered Pemra to confiscate the equipment of broadcasters and seal their premises without consulting a council of complaints, which was envisaged in amendments passed in February this year. It increased the fine for violators to Rs10 million from one million rupees. President Musharraf had issued the original Pemra Ordinance on March 1, 2002, to establish a body to regulate the electronic media and the National Assembly passed the law on May 17, 2005, with some amendments in the form of a bill (Pemra Amendment Bill).
It will be pertinent to mention here that Mohammad Ali Jinnah resigned from the Legislative Council in March 1919 to protest against the Rowlatt Act while describing it as a black law, for it empowered the British regime to imprison anyone without assigning any reason or charge. Jinnah had serious reservations over such a provision as he believed that such an enactment was against the principle of justice.
Similarly, a plain reading of these amendments would suggest that these (until officially withdrawn) could/would be used as tools to condemn the media which is justified in describing it as a draconian law because it authorises Pemra to move on its own – given the fact that Pemra was transferred to the information ministry from the cabinet division. This is against the government’s own policy of keeping such authorities independent so that they can function on their own and without any pressure.
The government has not been happy with TV channels for their live coverage of the present judicial crisis. It attempted to teach a lesson to Geo through the police when a heavy contingent trespassed its office in Islamabad in March when the Chief Justice was to appear before the Supreme Judicial Council. Then came May 12 when people in Karachi saw residents bathed in blood on their TV screens. The Chief Justice was forced to return to Islamabad after staying in the airport for well over nine hours although he was scheduled to address a function of the Supreme Court there. These events unnerved the government and it blocked the transmission of channels.
Article 19 of the Constitution ensures freedom of speech as it says, “Every citizen shall have the right to the freedom of speech and freedom of expression and there shall be freedom of the press”. The level of freedom enjoyed by media organisations currently is primarily due to their own relentless struggle otherwise successive governments, especially military dispensations, have always tried to put curbs on the freedom of expression.
The worst form of repression was witnessed during Ziaul Haq’s regime which even flogged journalists. Similarly, the Press and Publications Ordinance 1963 promulgated by military dictator Ayub Khan was the focus of protest by journalists’ bodies and organisations of publications’ owners. It was finally revoked in 1988.
On countless occasions President General Pervez Musharraf was heard telling the nation that it was his government that issued licences to TV channels as well as liberty but recent events are contrary to his claims. This year is going to be an election year and the president is promising free, fair and transparent elections. But polls will hardly be regarded as free and fair if the media continues to receive a bashing at the hands of the government and there is no end of efforts to muzzle the press.
What was witnessed in the National Assembly’s press gallery on June 6 was unprecedented too as it involved journalist protesting against Pemra amendments and they scuffled with non-journalists who were sent in the gallery by the Press Information Department (PID). The next day’s ban on the entry of journalists in the National Assembly was imposed for the first time in parliamentary history.
If the government fails to pay serious attention to the issue, it will find it difficult to control the situation that is bound to be aggravated by any verdict on the presidential reference that does not go in favour of the Chief Justice.
Source: Dawn
Date:6/26/2007
” 
” 
” 
” 
” 
