ISLAMABAD   -    The Supreme Court of Pakistan Friday accepted the unconditional apology of Senator Faisal Vawda and MQM MNA Mustafa Kamal in the contempt case.

A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Naeem Afghan and Justice Aqeel Abbasi conducted hearing of the suo moto notice which the apex court took on Faisal Vawda and Mustafa Kamal’s press conferences.

The lawmakers – Faisal Vawda and Mustafa Kamal – tendered unconditional apology and are ready to withdraw their statements. The bench, therefore, in view of the matter accepted the apology, expected that they (Vawda and Kamal) would stand by their commitments. The court warned them that if there will be transgression by both of them in future then simple apology would not be entertained.

The bench on June 5 had issued notices to 34 TV channels for airing the press conferences of Senator Vawda and Mustafa Kamal. The court noted that broadcast and re-telecast of the press conferences also constitute contempt and directed them to file reply that why contempt proceedings are not initiated against them.

During the hearing, Advocate Faisal Siddiqui, appearing on behalf of 26 TV channels, submitted preliminary response. The Court noted that the documents have not been signed by the representatives of the TV channels, rather Faisal Siddiqui and Usman Mirza signed them, and all the documents were same that they can be proceeded if there was mal intent be shown.

The principle of contempt of court of mal intent must be established. They also stated that the broadcast of the press conferences was in the interest of the people in light of Article 19 of the constitution.

The court noted even if it is assumed that the document filed in pursuance to the Court notice. The said channels have justified the telecast of the press conferences. Despite the fact that Faisal Siddiqui did consider that one of the press conferences constitute the contempt.

The order observed that the defence taken by the channels is not responsible when said by other for contempt there must be mal intent that this is their right and duty to do so. “In our considered opinion this is not justified. We therefore now are constraint to issue show cause to the TV channels,” it added.

The court further said that since the rest of the channels have not filed their reply to the SC June 5 order the contempt notice also issued to them that why they should not be proceeded.

It stated that detraction press conference telecast by the channels transpired that the same press conferences or some portions of them were re-telecast. Undoubtedly, the commercial entities the TV channels re-broadcast.

Each channel was directed to provide the material in reply, which advertisements preceded the press conferences. The reply should also stipulate the time of press conferences and the amount earned from those press conferences.

It directed that the reply of the show-cause notices be signed by the owner of the channels, and the chief executive of channel or whatever the name they are called and the channels are directed to file replies in two weeks time.