ISLAMABAD - The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has said that the freedom of expression does not license a journalist or a publisher even inadvertently or unintentionally to facilitate influencing of pending proceedings or casting aspersions on judges in the garb of an affidavit which does not form part of any judicial proceedings.
A single bench of Chief Justice Athar Minallah stated this in his written order issued on Friday regarding the hearing of the contempt case which was heard on 28-12-2021. The bench had issued show cause notices to Shakil ur Rehman, Editor in Chief, Aamir Ghouri, Editor, Ansar Abbasi and Rana Mohammad Shamim, former Chief Judge of the Supreme Appellate Court of Gilgit-Baltistan after publication of a news item claiming that Rana Shamim executed an affidavit in which he had levelled allegations against former Chief Justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar. It has already decided to frame charges against the alleged contemnors on 07-11-2021 and has appointed Attorney General for Pakistan as a prosecutor in this case.
The IHC bench said in its order that the alleged contemnors appear to have believe that as ‘messengers’ they have absolute freedom to publish a document in the form of an affidavit regardless of the truth of its contents or the intent or effect in the context of the right to fair trial of the litigants and due administration of justice in relation to pending proceedings.
It added, “This is no more than lack of appreciation of the responsibilities and duties carried with freedom of expression. While jealously guarding freedom of expression and free press, it is the simultaneous duty of the Court to protect the solemnity of pending judicial proceedings and the right to a fair trial of the litigants and their confidence in the due administration of justice.”
Rana Shamim, others to be indicted on January 7: IHC
The court said it appeared that probably Ansar Abbasi and Aamir Ghouri do not properly appreciate the importance of obstruction to and interference with administration of justice or attempt to influence the outcome of pending proceedings. It continued, “They also do not appear to know the limits and exceptions to the freedom of expression e.g. as described in Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.”
It noted that they believe that the copy of a leaked document in the form of an affidavit, that too obtained mysteriously without the consent of its executor, can be reported and made public regardless of its contents or its profound consequences in the context of obstruction to and interference with the administration of justice. Alarmingly, they have no hesitation in justifying the publication of a mysteriously leaked document containing serious aspersions on the impartiality and independence of this Court and its judges. The order said that Aamir Ghouri and Ansar Abbassi have stressed that the reporting and publication of the news item, regardless of its consequences, was protected by the freedom of expression as a journalistic duty. Freedom of expression is not an absolute right and for a journalist it carries with it responsibilities and duties.
This Court is mindful of the paramount importance of guarding free press and freedom of expression and it is manifested by its judgments.
He, however, said, “Freedom of expression is subject to acting responsibly and respecting other people’s rights. The law of contempt is not meant to protect the judge nor his/her dignity but it is, rather, essentially concerned with interference with the administration of justice.”
He further said that it becomes necessary in a democratic society in order to protect fair trial and to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice. The subjudice rule i.e. no one should interfere with legal proceedings which are pending, is an established exception to the freedom of expression.
