Uncalled for pressure
THE recent press conferences by Senators Faisal Vawda and Talal Chaudhry, where they demanded evidence from judges regarding allegations of interference by intelligence agencies in judicial affairs, reflect a troubling disregard for the judiciary’s sanctity. Their outbursts are unjustified, as the SC is already addressing the matter. The six IHC judges collectively addressed their concerns in a letter to the Supreme Judicial Council and Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa has taken suo motu notice of the issue. It is up to the judiciary to investigate and decide on such serious matters internally. External pressures and public demands for evidence compromise the integrity of the process and create undue controversy. Moreover, singling out Justice Babar Sattar, as Senator Vawda did, is egregious, at a time when the judge and his family have already been subjected to a vilification campaign. Such personal attacks are not only malicious but also detract from the substantive issues at hand. It is essential to remember that the allegations were not made by a single judge in isolation but were a collective expression of concern from multiple judges. Therefore, targeting Justice Sattar undermines the collective voice and courage of the judiciary.
The timing and nature of these pressers are highly questionable. The matter is sub judice, and it is inappropriate to publicly question the integrity of the judges while the court is still reviewing the case. Senators Vawda and Chaudhry have politicised a judicial issue, making one question the motive behind such stunts. In addition, Senator Vawda’s call for ‘institutions’ not to be targeted rings hollow in light of his own actions. By publicly criticising the judiciary and demanding evidence in such a confrontational manner, he is guilty of the very behaviour he condemns. If the judiciary’s history and performance are to be scrutinised, it should be done through proper legal routes, not through media spectacles. The politicians’ outspokenness has reportedly drawn the attention of the SC, which is expected to hear the matter today. It is vital for Pakistan’s institutions that each respects the role and jurisdiction of the other. The judiciary must be allowed to operate independently, free from external ‘demands’. Public trust in the judicial system is paramount, and it is damaged when political figures exploit sensitive issues for their own agendas.
Published in Dawn, May 17th, 2024
Dangerous law
OUR political leaders never seem to learn from their mistakes. The Punjab Assembly is due to vote on a new defamation law for the province, which, its government says, has been designed to ‘stop fake news’. Speaking at a press conference on Wednesday, the provincial information minister sought to assure the media’s growing apprehensions regarding the proposed law in the following words: “[Only] a person who lies under the guise of a journalist with a specific agenda will face the music under this proposed law.”
Her choice of words is telling. The PML-N, which leads the government in Punjab, has had a rough few years as far as its image-building efforts are concerned. Even though it has returned to power at the centre and Punjab, its public image has proven extremely difficult to rehabilitate. The minister’s words merely reflect the frustration her party feels at those who have been making the job more difficult.
The PML-N’s first attempt at putting a muzzle on this new class of ‘influencers’, which set the narrative on social media platforms like X, Facebook, TikTok and others, took the form of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 — a law that was widely criticised for placing draconian limitations on Pakistanis’ digital rights. Later, the PTI, too, tried to build on Peca to make its worst aspects more ‘effective’ in silencing critics. Thankfully, both efforts were largely neutralised, owing to the efforts of journalists and rights activists who identified the severe consequences for freedom of speech and expression that such legislation would entail. Unfortunately, the PML-N has now returned with what seems to be an even sharper weapon to silence criticism.
Much more detailed than the Defamation Ordinance, 2002, it will replace, the new Punjab Defamation Bill, 2024 goes even further than the dictatorship-era regulations laid out in the original law. With a dangerously loose definition of defamation, much higher financial penalties and blanket restrictions on commenting on ongoing cases, it seems to have been drafted with the sole purpose of striking fear in anyone who may be contemplating criticising or expressing their frustrations at those currently in power.
Worst still, the law has been finalised without seeking input from civil society, journalists’ unions or even the political opposition. Already, several media organisations and journalists’ representative bodies have denounced the proposed law and intend to fight it.
The Punjab government would be well-advised to put the brakes on this bill till it can get key stakeholders on board. It must remember that the same law can be weaponised against it one day, just as Peca was when the PTI took power. Online defamation is a growing problem, but one cannot cut off the nose to spite one’s face. This issue must be handled with utmost care.
Published in Dawn, May 17th, 2024
KP tussle
THE growing war of words between KP Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur and Governor Faisal Karim Kundi is affecting governance in the province and vitiating the atmosphere at a time when combined efforts of the provincial administration and the centre are needed to address KP’s myriad issues. The latest development in this exchange has been the provincial government’s decision to bar Mr Kundi from using KP House in Islamabad. Moreover, Mr Gandapur has threatened to take over the federally run provincial power distribution company over the issue of excessive outages. The CM, who belongs to the PTI, is not known for his political sangfroid and has hardly had a smooth relationship with the PML-N-led federal government. But his spat with Mr Kundi, who is a PPP member, is taking an unsavoury turn, with the governor also at times using intemperate language.
Testy relations between the centre and provincial administrations are part of this country’s political history, especially when different parties are running Islamabad and the provinces. For example, during Benazir Bhutto’s first stint in PM House, ties with the Nawaz Sharif-led Punjab government were often frosty. Similarly, when the PPP government was in power after the 2008 polls, relations with the Shehbaz Sharif-led Punjab administration could get downright toxic, with the centre imposing governor’s rule in the province in 2009. Yet there are also positive examples in this regard. For instance, during the PDM’s tenure, the prime minister and then president Arif Alvi maintained a working relationship, even though the PDM had ousted Mr Alvi’s party from power. Therefore, both constitutional officeholders in KP need to adopt the path of dialogue rather than confrontation. Both men belong to different parties, and hail from the same district — Dera Ismail Khan — and localised political rivalries are likely having an impact on their relationship. But the KP CM and governor need to take the high road, shun petty differences, and maintain working relations.
Published in Dawn, May 17th, 2024