KARACHI: An anti-terrorism court on Monday vacated the notice issued to the Chief Editor, Chief Reporter and Publisher of ‘Dawn’ in a contempt of court case.

The Chief editor ‘Dawn’ appeared in person in Anti-terrorism Court No V with editors and reporters of other newspapers against whom the court had issued notices for publishing politicians’ statements critical of anti-terrorism court.

A part from presenting other arguments, the ‘Dawn’ reply maintained that “the impugned publication does not scandalize this Hon’ble Court and, in case it is so construed, cognizance of contempt of a subordinate court has to be taken by the High Court under section 5 of the Contempt of Court Act 1976…….”

‘Dawn’ through its counsel, Mr. Munir A. Malik, presented to the court following defense:

“That the undersigned has not been served to date with a copy of the show cause notice. The undersigned is, however, aware from the press reports appearing in this regard, including the press report published of the proceedings of 26th September 1999 in the above matter before this Hon’ble Court, of the issuance of a show cause notice under Section 37 of Act XXVII of 1997.”

“That the undersigned is acting on the assumption that the show cause notice issued to him in parimateria to the show cause notice issued to the Chief Editor, Insaf Times, Karachi of which a copy had been made available to the undersigned and in respect of the report appearing in Dawn on 17-d-1999.

“That the undersigned respectfully submits at the outset that the newspaper ‘Dawn’ is a publication known for its integrity, fairness and quality reporting both nationally and internationally. In its columns has rendered yeoman’s services to the cause of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.

“That Act XXVII of 1997 has been the subject of the considerable debate in the country and abroad and in fact has been the subject of decision of a full bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Mehram Ali and other versus Federation of Pakistan and others reported at PLD 1998 SC 1445 wherein a number of provisions of the said Act including Section 37, as originally framed, was found by the Supreme Court of Pakistan to be invalid as the militated against the concept of independence of judiciary and Articles 175 and 203 of the Constitution. Newspaper reports published by the daily Dawn have been a reflection of this debate and the issues that were being raised. In all its reports, as well as in the impugned report, awn has made comments or reported in good faith in the public interest and in temperate language without impugning the integrity or impartiality of any judge. Dawn carried the news conference of Senator Aftab Shaikh in this background. The report of August 16, 1999 does not on the face of it refer to courts constituted under Act XXVII of 1997.

“That while reiterating that Dawn firmly believes in the independence of judiciary and the judicial process, Section 37 of the said Act, as amended, is not in consonance with the spirit of the Supreme Court judgment in the afore cited case.

“That it is respectfully submitted that the show cause notice does not contain the substance of the charge as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the afore cited case. It is respectfully submitted that the impugned publication does not scandalize this Hon’ble Court and in case it is so construed cognizance of contempt of a subordinate court has to be taken by the High Court under Section 5 of the Contempt of court act 1976 as this court is a court subordinate to the High Court within the meaning of articles 175, 202 and 203 of the constitution of Pakistan as held by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Mehram ali. The words “such other courts as may be established by law” employed in clause (1) of article 175 of the Constitution are relatable to the subordinate courts referred to in Article 203 thereof.

“It is respectfully submitted that the power of contempt should be used sparingly and only in serious cases as the usefulness of the contempt jurisdiction depends on the wisdom and restraint with which it is exercised as laid down in the case of Masroor Ahsan vs. Ardeshir Cowasjee PLD 1998 SC 823.

“That if any portion of the impugned report has given the impression of disrespect to any Hon’ble Judge, the undersigned feels sorry for the sam. The undersigned denies that he ever meant or committed any contempt of court.

“It is, therefore, prayed that the show cause notice under reply may be withdrawn/discharged.”

Source: Dawn

Date:10/6/1999