Justice QAZI FAEZ ISA vs PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN arts — 2023 PLD 661 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.

Justice QAZI FAEZ ISA VS PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN arts. 19, 19-a, 25, 178, 184(3), 188, 191 & 209(5)(b)---Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XXXIII, R. 6---Broadcasting or live streaming of court proceedings---Constitutionality and permissibility---Review petitions before the Supreme Court challenging the directions given to the tax authorities by the Supreme Court to conduct an inquiry into the foreign assets of petitioner judge's family members and submit a report to the Supreme Judicial Council despite quashing of Presidential reference against the petitioner-judge---Present application was filed by the petitioner-judge praying that the Supreme Court may order live-streaming of the court proceedings of his case (review petitions), and direct the State-owned Pakistan Television Corporation (PTV) to broadcast live proceedings of his case and the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory authority (PEMRa) to issue written instructions to all private television channels that they cannot be restrained in any manner whatsoever from broadcasting the proceedings---Maintainability and competency---[Per Munib akhtar, J. (Majority view)]: Present application raised an altogether new prayer that had no nexus with the review jurisdiction of the Court; it also involved adjudication of substantive law issues and, appeared to be wrongly filed as a miscellaneous matter in the review jurisdiction of the Court---Present application could not cross the hurdle of maintainability by relying on O. XXXIII, R. 6 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, as the said Rule had no relevance to the facts of the present case---Present Bench was sitting, as an "open court"---Public, which was always welcome to sit in the open court proceedings, included members of the press and, vloggers and bloggers; they were free to witness Court proceedings and frequently did so---Relief sought through the present application was novel, as there had been no judicial pronouncements by the Supreme Court on the merits and demerits of allowing public broadcast and/or live streaming of Court proceedings---Exercise of deciding the issue of public broadcast and/or live streaming could only be deliberated upon on and be approved by the Court in its administrative manifestation, therefore, the Supreme Court referred the said issue to the Chief Justice so that he may place it before the Full Court for deliberation and appropriate action---application was dismissed]---[Per Maqbool Baqar, Mazhar alam Khan Miankhel and Syed Mansoor ali Shah, JJ. (Minority view): Prayer made in the present application for livestreaming and broadcasting the court-proceedings could be decided only by the present Bench, and cannot be agitated through filing a separate constitution petition under article 184(3) of the Constitution---Cases heard by the Supreme Court in its original jurisdiction under article 184(3) of the Constitution, including review petitions and other matters arising therein, are matters of public importance within the meaning and scope of that expression used in article 19a of the Constitution---Live-streaming (audio and video) of the court-proceedings in cases heard by the Supreme Court, on a petition or suo motu, under article 184(3) of the Constitution, should be made available for the information of the public through a link on the official website of the Court, in the enforcement of the fundamental right of the public, and for the fulfillment of the obligation of the Court, under article 19a of the Constitution---Registrar of the Supreme Court shall take steps to provide for the requisite technological infrastructure for livestreaming the court-proceedings---Registrar shall also place the matter before the Court, on the administrative side, for considering amendments in the Supreme Court Rules 1980, in order to livestream court-proceedings of all cases heard under article 184(3) and to regulate the practice and procedure in this regard---Keeping in view the current state of technological infrastructure available in the Supreme Court and the fact that the review petitions filed in the case were fixed for hearing, audio recording of the proceedings of the court-hearings of the petitioner's case shall be made available through a link on the official website of the Supreme Court, for public information]---[Per Yahya afridi, J. (partially agreeing with the majority view with respect to dismissal of present application): Relief sought by the petitioner through present application would negate the very spirit of the oath taken by him---However the right of the public to have access to live-streaming or audio-video recording, written transcript or any other medium, of the court hearings in the proceedings of public importance, including those under articles 184(3) and 186 of the Constitution, was their fundamental right under article 19a of the Constitution---Said right, however, could not be left to reign absolute, lest it be abused and, thus, it was required to be regulated by framing rules under article 191 of the Constitution]

Justice QAZI FAEZ ISA vs PRESIDENT OF PAKISTAN arts — 2023 PLD 661 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLD