Supreme Court Issues Fresh Show-Cause Notices to 34 TV Channels Amid Contempt Case; Asked To Submit Earning Details
The Supreme Court on June 28 reissued show-cause notices to 34 television channels for allegedly airing contemptuous remarks made by lawmakers, emphasizing strict scrutiny of media conduct. The notices were part of an ongoing contempt case against Senator Faisal Vawda and MQM-P MNA Mustafa Kamal, with the court questioning the adequacy of the channels’ explanations.
The bench, headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and including Justices Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, focused on whether the media channels had adhered to judicial directives in their broadcasts. The court pointed out discrepancies in the defenses presented by the channels and noted the absence of official signatures on the responses, questioning their authenticity.
In court, Advocate Faisal Siddiqui, representing 26 of the implicated channels, argued that the broadcasts were carried out in public interest, citing the right to information under Article 19A of the Constitution. However, Justice Isa highlighted that the channels’ responses did not convincingly address potential mal-intent in airing the statements.
The Supreme Court also accepted unconditional apologies from Vawda and Kamal for their remarks against the judiciary. The lawmakers assured the court of their regret and committed to avoiding such remarks in the future. Justice Isa withdrew the show-cause notices against them but emphasized the expectation of adherence to their statements to avoid future judicial repercussions.
The court has requested detailed records of earnings from the broadcasts in question, as part of its examination of the case. The hearing is set to continue, with the court expecting comprehensive responses from the remaining channels. This ongoing case marks a significant judicial review of media practices in relation to court proceedings.
The initial notices were issued on June 5, directing the channels through the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) to justify why they should not face contempt proceedings. The controversy arose after the channels broadcast separate press conferences where Vawda and Kamal launched harsh criticisms against the judiciary, subsequently covered extensively by the media.
” 
” 
” 
” 
” 
