ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) was informed that the Prime Minister’s Office has not allowed any intelligence agencies, including Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) and Intelligence Bureau (IB), to record any conversation.
A single bench of Justice Babar Sattar on Wednesday heard the petitions of former chief justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar’s son Mian Najam-us-Saqib and former Prime Minister Imran Khan’s wife Bushra Bibi regarding their audio conversation leaks.
During the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan submitted a report prepared by the Prime Minister’s Office, saying that the PMO is clear that the ISI and IB are not allowed to record any conversations.
The IHC judge asked why the ISI filed the report through the Ministry of Defence. At this, the AGP replied that the intelligence agency should have filed the report through the Prime Minister’s Office. He added that according to the ISI report, the investigation could proceed only after taking assistance from social media platforms.
Awan informed the bench that the FIA was given the duty to determine who had recorded the call and it is approaching telecom companies under the court’s directives. He pointed out that the agency would require access to relevant internet protocol addresses for this purpose. He maintained that if any agency is recording conversations, then it is doing so illegally. He said that the ISI had stressed that obtaining reports from social media platforms was crucial for advancing the investigation.
At that Justice Sattar noted that the PMO report mentioned the ISI as saying that the latter could not trace the source from where the audio was leaked.
On the other hand, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA)’s lawyer said that the private audio leaks could not be broadcast by TV channels. The bench asked what action the PEMRA was taking on the matter.
The PEMRA’s counsel answered that TV channels would not air this kind of audio and they have sent the matter to the Council of Complaints which will decide it.
Justice Babar asked whether the PEMRA was effectively functioning as a regulator. He further asked if the authority had issued urgent instructions to the TV channels. He added that so, you are saying that you cannot take immediate action and the matter will go to the Council of Complaints.
Latif Khosa said that not once but for the entire day the TV channels continued to broadcast the audio. He said it was derogatory treatment.
The IHC bench observed that on the one hand, there was freedom of information and on the other hand, there was the matter of privacy, and how it could be balanced. He said that it was the responsibility of the state to ensure both.
The counsel, Aitzaz Ahsan, said that there should be self-regularization, but here even the Constitution was not being implemented. He cited the delay in polls as an example.
The court, quoting a news report, asked the AGP to check if IB was given the authority to record calls. The AGP replied that he would look into it and appraise the court.
The IHC bench directed the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) to submit a detailed report at the next hearing. It further said that if the government did not come up with the required information then the court would appoint national and international amici curiae for the purpose.
The court ordered the FIA and other institutions to submit their replies and adjourned the hearing while it also decided to appoint senior journalists as amici curiae on the matter related to the code of conduct of TV channels.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2023
Comments
Comments are closed.