ISLAMABAD: The journalistic community took up their grievances with the Supreme Court on Wednesday, contesting “roving inquiries” conducted by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and the issuance of summons by a joint investigation team (JIT) on “vague” allegations of conducting a malicious campaign against the superior judiciary.

The Press Association of the Supreme Court (PAS) and the Islamabad High Court Journalists Association (IHCJA), represented by senior counsel Salahuddin Ahmed, filed a petition arguing that such inquiries by the JIT had sent a chilling effect and unreasonably restricted the right of free speech and information guaranteed under Article 19 and 19-A of the Constitution.

The petitioners also called upon the apex court to strike down Rule 17 of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Investigation Rules, 2018, which facilitates the involvement of intelligence and other government bodies in JIT operations.

The petition sought a declaration from the Supreme Court that the FIA lacks the jurisdiction to investigate so-called “explicit and malicious campaign against judges and declare the same to be in violation of Article 19, 19-A, 175 and 204 of the Constitution and ultra vires PECA 2016 and consequently strike down the interior ministry’s Feb 16, 2020, notification and any notices issued by the FIA under Section 160 of the CrPC”.

Urge top court to nullify PECA rule that facilitates involvement of intelligence, other govt bodies in JIT

The petition argued that the power to punish for scandalising a judge or the judiciary — so cautiously and sparingly exercised by the Supreme Court itself — could not be handed over to the FIA for using it when it deems fit since it would allow the executive to destroy the freedom of speech.

This would violate the doctrine of separation of powers, the petition argued, adding that a lack of appropriate self-regulation by the media in some cases should not be compensated by a sweeping use of criminal proceedings against journalists to intimidate or blackmail the media.

Nor could a lack of implementation and enforcement of tort liabilities under defamation or other media-related laws by our subordinate judiciary or concerned statutory bodies be compensated through criminal prosecution of journalists, the petition emphasised.

It said that when the FIA took over the duties of enforcing contempt laws by misusing PECA, journalists were often deprived of fair hearing or bail by trial courts, which might be influenced on the grounds that the matter pertained to the apex court.

The petition said it was more appropriate that any matter of contempt of the Supreme Court should be tackled by the top court itself. Defamatory or contemptuous material on social media was not attributable to recognised journalists, but even to state-sponsored sources, the petition said, adding that the Supreme Court’s Jan 13, 2024, decision in the bat symbol case was a matter of great public interest and had very significant political implications.

Therefore, the judgment was subjected to public comment and criticism in print, electronic and social media — some expressed in scathing terms and some of which was unjustified.

The petition argued that it was for the Supreme Court to determine whether any such comment or criticism constituted contempt of court and, if so, whether any further action was warranted.

Last month, the Ministry of Interior formed a JIT under Section 30 of PECA 2016 to investigate the ongoing malicious campaign on social media against Supreme Court judges and submit a preliminary report within 15 days. The team was headed by the FIA’s additional director general of the cybercrime wing and also comprised representatives of IB, ISI, DIG ICT Police, PTA, etc.

The journalists’ petition argued that the interior ministry had confused the role of JIT with an inquiry commission.

It said that the intent behind setting up a JIT involving representatives of intelligence agencies with such broad and all-encompassing reach was clearly to send a message to all that any person who criticised the Supreme Court on social media would be liable to arrest and serious punishment.

It said that a total of 65 notices had been issued to various people, including more than 30 journalists, pursuant to no less than 115 inquiries registered in the 15 cybercrime reporting centres of the FIA, located in Karachi, Hyderabad, Sukkur, Multan, Faisalabad, Lahore, Gujranwala, Rawalpindi, Gilgit, Islamabad, Peshawar, Abbottabad, Dera Ismail Khan, Quetta and Gwadar.

Published in Dawn, February 29th, 2024