PPF rejects blanket ban on coverage of court proceedings by Pemra; alarming overreach by the regulator to leave a gaping hole in reporting from courts
Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF) rejects the blanket ban on coverage of court proceedings by the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra). This order, which prohibits all coverage of court proceedings except those broadcast live from the court, is an unacceptable overreach by the regulator. The move will leave a gaping hole in reporting from courts. It will cut off citizens from coverage of all court proceedings, including those pertaining to key political developments in the country.
It is deeply troubling that the regulatory body has chosen to restrict media coverage of a vital constitutional pillar of democracy. This action directly infringes upon the rights to free expression, safeguarded under articles 19 and 19A of the Constitution.
In a directive dated May 21 on the discussion of sub-judice matters, the regulator directed that “no content, including commentary, opinions, or suggestions about the potential fate of such sub-judice matters which tend to prejudice, the determination by a court, tribunal, etc., shall be aired.”
Pemra directed television channels to refrain from airing tickers or headlines regarding court proceedings and should only report on the court’s written orders. The exception to this was where the court proceedings were broadcast live. It remains unclear whether the directive applies to all courts in Pakistan. If so, since live proceedings are only broadcast by the Supreme Court, all other courts will be completely cut off from coverage until written orders are issued.
Citing the Pemra Code of Conduct, 2015, and various Supreme Court orders, the directive stated that it was observed that TV channels while reporting on court proceedings, were airing content out of context. “Channels are airing exaggerated versions and statements of legal counsels in order to spread despair, sensationalism and to attract high ratings,” the regulator claimed, adding that judges’ observations were being broadcast without mentioning context or waiting for the court order or decision. “Therefore, airing of such content shows negligence on the part of the editorial boards of the TV channels,” the directive stated.
The Press Association of the Supreme Court (PAS) and the Islamabad High Court Journalists Association have rejected the directive and stated that it was “against the freedom of the press and independence of the judiciary.”
The Pemra directive has been challenged in the Lahore High Court and the Islamabad High Court.
” 
” 
” 
” 
” 
