SUO MOTU CASE NO.7 OF 2017 vs Ss — 2019 PLD 318 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

SUO MOTU CASE NO.7 OF 2017 VS Ss. 20(c) & 27(a)---prevention of electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016), Ss. 11 & 12---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 19 & 184(3)---Suo motu action regarding Islamabad-Rawalpindi sit-in protest by members of a religious political party---Hate speech and incitement to violence spread through electronic media---Failure of Pakistan electronic Media Regulatory Authority to fulfil its statutory duty---Leadership of the political party in question created hatred amongst the people, they abused, threatened and advocated violence; and this was broadcasted by some private television channels---Reports of an intelligence agency revealed that a particular TV channel supported the political party in question and its owners had supplied food to the protestors---Pakistan electronic Media Regulatory Authority ("the Authority"), however, did not take action under the Pakistan electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002 ('the Ordinance') against any of its licencees for violating the terms of their licences---Authority abdicated its statutory duty, a duty which it was legally obliged to fulfil---Authority also failed to protect the legitimate rights of two of its licensed broadcasters---Broadcasts by said two licencees were stopped/interrupted in certain areas of the country; complaints stating this were acknowledged by the Authority---Authority looked the other way and did nothing to protect the interests of its licencees nor took action against those cable operators who were responsible---Hate which was spread and the violence which was incited through electronic means appeared not to have been investigated, let alone the violators prosecuted and punished---Supreme Court directed that broadcasters who broadcasted messages advocating or inciting the commission of an offence violated the Ordinance and the terms of their licences and must be proceeded against by the Authority in accordance with the law; that cable operators who stopped or interrupted the broadcast of licenced broadcasters must be proceeded against by the Authority in accordance with the Ordinance, and if this was done on the behest of others then the Authority should report those so directing the cable operators to the concerned authorities; and that those spreading messages through electronic means which advocated or incited the commission of an offence were liable to be prosecuted under the prevention of electronic Crimes Act, 2016.

SUO MOTU CASE NO.7 OF 2017 vs Ss — 2019 PLD 318 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2019 PLD