In any democratic country, media plays the role of a watchdog to ensure that the executive, legislative and judicial organs of the state perform their due roles in public interest. An assertive private media is a hallmark of the process of democratization currently under way in Pakistan. One of the country’s leading English magazine’s, weekly Pulse, quest for the purpose has come at a cost.
On September 25, a two-member bench of the Supreme Court framed charges against the paper’s Editor-in-Chief Mohsin Jameel and Editor Production Samar Rao for publishing a news story titled “SC Registrar oversteps jurisdiction” in its June 22-28, 2012 issue. The short story appeared as part of the magazine’s cover story on Dr Arsalan case questioning the veracity of the SC verdict in the case, which was hurriedly disposed of on grounds of being a “matter between two private parties”. It was based on an email allegedly sent by SC Registrar Dr Faqir Hussain to Copperstones, a UK-based public relations firm which reportedly facilitated the pleasure trips of Dr Arsalan Iftikhar, the son of SC Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, in London.
However, much of the story contributed by Online – Pakistan’s news agency – was about the double extension of the SC Registrar. It raised the issue of two-yearly extensions in the Registrar’s service after retirement – in 2010 and 2012, respectively – since the grounds on which the extensions were granted seemed to violate the court’s own strict rulings concerning the rehiring of retired public servants.
The court’s response to the Pulse story has been exceptionally hasty, as it took a suo motu action against the magazine, issuing a contempt notice to its chief editor and editor production and asking them to appear with replies in person on 1 August.
The apparent haste in court proceedings, as well as the fact of turning the case of a media person versus a public servant, necessitate that some crucial facts pertaining to the case concerned should be put on record before the trial begins.
Firstly, the magazine story had not mentioned the contents of the email in question, and it was essentially about the issue of double extension of the SC Registrar. Yet it is this email that has become the basis of the contempt of court proceedings. Secondly, the Registrar is not a judge but a rehired retired bureaucrat. And, thirdly, the source of the said email could be easily traced by any public or private investigative body, which is certainly not the SC (even if the honourable judges on the bench have decided otherwise).
All in all, the constitution of Pakistan guarantees the fundamental right of free expression; and, as fourth pillar of the state fabric, the magazine should continue to articulate public interest and hold state institutions, including the judiciary, to account if and when they waver from their respective public responsibilities.
IMRAN ALI SANDANO
China
