ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court was informed on Monday that YouTube had rejected the Pakistan Telecom Authority (PTA)’s request for removal of blasphemous video clips since the government did not have such an agreement with the website.

After the court order, PTA Director General Waseem Tauqir told a three-judge SC bench under Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry that it had written a letter to YouTube for removal of such clips, but the video-sharing website replied that it did not had any such agreement with the Pakistani government.

He said almost 100 new clips of the anti-Islam film were proliferated on YouTube daily. The director general told the bench the authority had been vigorously monitoring and blocking the Anti-Islamic video uploaded on the worldwide web day and night.

He furnished the list of 753 anti Islamic websites, which had been blocked on Internet by PTA, adding that out of which, over 650 URLs had been banned on YouTube. He said the PTA had sent a list of Anti Islamic Secured Links to the Face book, which had been blocked from viewing.

Earlier, the SC took up the issue of blasphemy movie on an application filed by Akram Sheikh and Taufiq Asi. The application said in Pakistan this profane movie was still available on the website; therefore, the PTA was under legal obligation to control such content but it had failed to perform its statutory duties.

They appealed to the court to order the PTA to block the movie on YouTube website and adopt adequate measures to avert such acts in future. The court has directed the PTA to immediately block the offending material on the Internet.

Meanwhile, hearing the another case against, the court directed the Pemra to establish commonly-accepted standard of decency, keeping in view Article 37(g) of the Constitution and other relevant laws and then take short term and long term steps to control obscenity, indecency etc in two weeks.

The court noted that the Pemra has not laid commonly-accepted standard of decency, though constitutional and statutory provisions were available. Although the notices have been issued to some of the channels, it seems that except issuing notices, no short-term and long-term measures have been adopted.

It was further noted that there was no permanent Pemra chairman. The court also summoned Information and Broadcasting Ministry Secretary for explaining on behalf of the government as to why the permanent chairman has not been appointed so far. Hearing of the case is adjourned for three weeks.