ISLAMABAD - Dismissing Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan’s (MQM-P) Deputy Convener Mustafa Kamal’s request seeking immediate acceptance of his apology in a suo motu case, the Supreme Court Wednesday issued contempt notices to TV channels for broadcasting press conferences of Senator Faisal Vawda and MNA Mustafa Kamal, wherein they maligned judiciary.
A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and comprising Justice Irfan Saadat and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan conducted hearing of the suo moto, which Supreme Court took on Faisal Vawda and Mustafa Kamal’s press conferences.
Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) filed the transcript of the press conferences along with the question and answer session. It also filed the list of TV channels which broadcast the press conferences. According to it, 34 TV channels aired the press conference of Faisal Vawda and 28 channels telecast Mustafa Kamal’s press conference held on May 16.
The court noted that broadcasting and telecasting also constitute contempt therefore notices were issued to the TV channels, directing them to file reply that why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them. Pemra was directed to serve the notices to the channels.
Farogh Naseem, appearing on behalf of Kamal, filed an application saying his client tendered unconditional and unqualified apology for his press conference dated May 16, and throw at the mercy of the Court seeking forgiveness.
Farogh Naseem requested the court to accept his client’s one-page unconditional apology.
The lawyer stressed that his client had in fact talked about pending Riba (usury) cases. “Aren’t those cases [filed] before the Federal Shariat Court?” CJP Isa questioned.
Elaborating on the decision to take suo motu over the speeches, CJP said that nobody was subjected to abuse as he was.
“Is such abusive language used in any country?” CJP Isa questioned while lamenting the use of obscene language. “I didn’t take [suo motu] notice [regarding the criticism] on me but on the fact that you talked about the judiciary,” he added.
The CJP asked the lawyer if, as a court officer, he thought his client had committed contempt or not. Barrister Naseem replied in the negative.
Justice Isa also asked if it was not contempt, then what his client apologised for, adding that the nation needed a parliament and judiciary that were respected by the people. “I think this is the first time that we have taken notice of contempt of court. Faisal Vawda is in the Senate where there must be more decent and sorted people,” he said, adding that if there was such an attack on the judiciary in the presence of members of the assembly then it was an attack of one institution on another.
The CJP also remarked that Mustafa Kamal did not apologize when he went to the press club, at which the lawyer said his client was ready to do so if that was a condition. The reason for apologising is that Mustafa Kamal wants to respect the judiciary, he added.
Faisal Vawda instead of tendering unconditional apology prayed the court to withdraw show-cause notice issued to him for ridiculing the judiciary in a press conference. Faisal’s lawyer Moiz Ahmed sought time from the Court to further reflect on the reply, filed a day ago. He told that if so instructed by his client then will file amended reply. The bench directed him that if he intended to do so then file it within one week.
Vawda in his reply maintained that Shehbaz Sharif, Maulana Fazlur Rehman, and Raoof Hasan had also criticised the judiciary in strong terms. He pointed out that Hasan had threatened judges, while Shehbaz labelled judges as “black sheep,” and Fazl issued threats in a speech outside the SC building.
Vawda asserted his respect for the judiciary, stating, “I have every respect and regard for the judiciary and could never imagine doing any act which lowered the estimation of the judiciary in any manner.”
He maintained that criticizing judicial decisions that negatively impact citizens should not be considered contempt. He explained that his press conference highlighted the need for the judiciary to address issues affecting the public that have been neglected by both the judiciary and the executive. Vawda claimed his critique was made with bona fide intentions and was fair.
Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan said that the members of the Parliament should be mindful in using the words against the judges and the judiciary. Upon that the Chief Justice said that they do not want to suppress the freedom of speech. “If we make mistakes, then people should point out to us,” said the judge adding that criticize judgments after reading them, on legal basis.
He said that judges and the parliamentarians should not be at war with each. The role of judiciary is to decide cases, while the Parliament should pass laws for the betterment of the people.
Justice Irfan told Vawda that his press conference was persons specific as he had leveled allegations against two judges of the Islamabad High Court. He urged counsel for Kamal to hold a press conference expressing remorse about the earlier presser against the judiciary.
The AGP stated that it is the responsibility of the TV channels to prevent airing of material against the judges and judiciary. They should be mindful of their duties, adding if the channels stop telecasting such press conferences then it would discourage the people to unnecessarily criticize the judiciary.
The chief justice remarked they were giving time to Faisal Vawda to revise his reply submitted to court. Later, the bench adjourned hearing of the case till June 28.