This is with reference to Nasim Zehra’s article Objection m’ lord (21 Jan). Her analysis of prime minister’s appearance in the contempt notice in the Supreme Court is not much different than any analysis that we witness daily in TV talk shows that mostly are subjective and not objective. Ms Zehra’s conclusions also do not substantially point to any reform/improvement.
I object to the unnecessary coverage and publicity given to the event by the media prior to the date of hearing. So what if the PM was summoned in the apex court. We all trumpet that everyone is equal before law, if we believe in this then this was just another appearance and did not warrant the artificial hype as if heavens are going to fall.
It is so strange that a case that is still to be argued in the court of law is openly debated by media to influence the court and try to thrust own opinion on the courts. This drama goes on in the name of 180 million people who are least bothered on these issues. Such acts otherwise attract provision of contempt of court.
If our media stops giving live coverage to such events the undue hype will not be created. In fact, TV channels are a major contributing factor in creating an undue and unnecessary atmosphere of uncertainty and rowdyism by covering the event.
There is a mad race going on between various TV channels to give “breaking news”. Sooner or later, the Supreme Court will have to put restrictions on lawyers and party loyalists who are damaging the sanctity of the institution. Actually after the historic movement by lawyers and civil society in the year 2007 for the restoration of the judiciary, undue discussions in media and polarisation of lawyers’ behaviour is interfering and affecting the neutrality of our courts.
Chief Justice should take suo motu on lawyers’ activities in the Supreme Court premises and ban raising of slogans in favour of judges and the government. It should also condition the manner in which media propagates the cases under review in the Supreme Court. These steps will strengthen the judiciary and remove self-created apprehensions as if judiciary is against the government.
Lastly, the writer has rightly suggested to the Chief Justice to ban such activities, but this alone will not help till such time as media is also debarred in initiating debates on these cases and stops live coverage. We must show patience and wait for the judgment, once it is out it may be debated for any duration but not before that.
Pakistan is passing through its most critical period since its existence. We all have to be patient and show better sense of responsibility, ridiculing own institutions will not help. As responsible citizens, all of us must show maturity and the anchors in media are no exception.
MUKHTAR AHMED
Karachi