More pressure on media freedom

Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) did not seem to know what it was doing when it issued an order to TV channels, taking advantage of a contempt of court case being heard by the Islamabad High Court (IHC) against media channels who allegedly had violated rules that forbid discussion of sub judice matters. The order entitled "Directive - discussion and analysis on sub judice matter" said, as per Pemra code of conduct "role of anchors is to moderate the programmes in an objective, unbiased and impartial manner, excluding themselves from personal opinions, biases and judgments on any issue." Going on to reveal the purpose behind the action, it added, "therefore, anchors hosting regular shows should not appear in TV shows, whether own or other channels as subject matter experts."

The decision of putting restrictions on anchors makes no sense. True, during the proceedings of a case media is not supposed to comment on any aspect of it so as not to influence the outcome. That though applies to all TV discussion programmes as well as print media comments. But how does that connect with anchors appearing in talk shows of other channels as discussants, is difficult to figure out unless opinions expressed by some of them have annoyed certain holder(s) of high office. Article 19 of the Constitution stipulates "every citizen shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, and there shall be freedom of the press, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law." The restriction in the present instance clearly could not be seen either as reasonable or in consonance with the existing laws. In any event, as citizens, anchors who participate in other channels' current affairs programmes have as much a right to say what they think of an issue as any other person. Predictably, their reaction has been swift and strong. Reacting to Pemra's move, anchors have issued a statement reminding the regulator that it is not its "jurisdiction to decide who should be a guest speaker, expert and commentator on television shows. The essence of this directive is that the state will decide who can speak and on what issue." The Pakistan Electronic Media Editors, News Directors Association, the Council of Pakistan Newspapers Editors and other media bodies have also condemned the order.

Interestingly, even though Pemra is an independent entity, the response to its widely condemned action came from the Special Assistant to the Prime Minister, Firdaous Ashiq Awan. Backtracking from the order, she offered the explanation that anchors have not been stopped from expressing their views; they have their exclusive shows to discuss anything and everything. "The advisory", she went on, "is a reiteration of the existing code of conduct on court orders, which needs to be taken care of to avoid conjecture." This proved to be an ill-advised attempt to shift the responsibility to the court. Which was not to remain unnoticed. IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah has issued a contempt of court notice to Chairman of Pemra for using the court's name without prior permission or context as a means of persuasion to enforce strict guidelines on media houses' anchors. The court's intervention, hopefully, will go a long way in helping thwart the ongoing attempts at media.