A controversy marred the send-off ceremony held to honour the outgoing chief justice on Wednesday after reporters cried foul against the court admin for covertly providing footage of the event to a ‘favourite’ TV channel.
Even, the state-run television was not given permission to cover the full-court reference.
The event was held in the Supreme Court with Iftikhar Chaudhry in the chair. The court staff flouted constitutional provision by providing footage to one particular channel.
With the private TV channel airing the footage exclusively, the journalists present on the SC premises started protesting against what they called discrimination. They opined that they had been supporting the CJ since his suspension, but he had ditched them on his retirement day.
Several reporters alleged that the court staff had facilitated the private TV channel to cover the event. Feeling humiliated and alienated, the reporters from other media channels showed their displeasure, saying that fundamental rights of journalists were violated. They said that action should be taken against those responsible for this act.
When the protest gained momentum, CJ’s Staff Officer Abdul Hameed promised to hold an inquiry into the matter. He said the court admin had hired a private cameraman to record the event and had been asked to provide footage to all TV channels. However, his explanation further complicated the situation as he failed to satisfy the reporters during his brief media talk after the full-court reference. He maintained that the cameraman ran away with the footage. The journalists demanded that the new chief justice take suo motu action against this discrimination. They shouted slogans ‘Boycott Supreme Court’.
In a bid to resolve the matter, the court management invited the journalists to the dinner being hosted to honour the outgoing CJ. However, the Supreme Court Reporters’ Association decided to boycott the dinner.
Talking to reporters, SCBA Secretary Asif Cheema said an emergency meeting of the bar had been summoned and those favouring a single private TV channel would be exposed and the matter would be probed thoroughly.
Former Supreme Court Bar Association president Asma Jahangir said that a media group was busy in saving its sales tax. She said there was a clear discrimination by the court administration.
Senator Aitzaz Ahsan termed the discrimination by the SC management as “no ball”, adding that the matter seemed to be a pre-planned move.
Senior lawyer Dr Khalid Ranjha said that the SC registrar was bound to obey the orders of the chief justice. Terming the incident a violation of basic human rights, Dr Ranjha said that if anybody moved the court against this discrimination, he could accuse the CJ for ordering the registrar to favour the specific TV channel.
Renowned lawyer Ali Ahmed Kurd said the discriminatory treatment with the media should be thoroughly probed. Former law minister Senator Babar Awan termed the incident a violation of Article 4 of the constitution, adding that the matter should be thoroughly probed as favouring a private TV channel was a clear discrimination.
Former SCBA president Rashid A Rizvi said that providing footage to one particular channel was in violation of Article 25 of the constitution.
Former president Pervez Musharraf’s lawyer Ahmed Raza Kasuri said that the court staff had violated Article 25 of the constitution.
Justice (r) Saeeduz Zaman Siddiqui said the court staff did not have prerogative to provide footage to only one channel. He said that under the Article 25 of the constitution every citizen enjoyed equal rights.
‘Media savvy’ CJ’s send-off reference sparks controversy
