FIA submits reply to IHC in journalist’s harassment case

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) has submitted its reply to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) in response to a petition of a journalist, Taha Shakeel Siddiqui, for causing harassment to him.

Reply says that Siddiqui was required to probe his activities on social media; however, the inquiry has, now, been transferred to the cyber crime circle.

FIA’s Deputy Director Noman Ashraf Bodla, in his written reply, said that he was tasked to probe the activities of Siddiqui on social media, and in this connection, he made a phone call to him. As per reply Bodla was polite on phone and did not harass Siddiqui. As the inquiry in this matter has now been transferred to cyber crime circle of the FIA, therefore, he has become irrelevant in this case, Bodla said in reply.

Justice Aamer Farooq of the IHC on May 23 had issued notices to the FIA after a journalist approached the court that FIA counter-terrorism department has been harassing him without any justification. The IHC bench had restrained FIA from harassing the petitioner.

The petitioner, a journalist with a France based television channel, has adopted that on May 18, 2017, he received a phone call apparently from Noman Bodla, who introduced himself from the Counter Terrorism Department of the FIA and demanded that the petitioner may appear before him at the FIA Headquarters for an interrogation. On the petitioner’s query as to the nature of the interrogation, Bodla responded vaguely and gave no details of the interrogation that he was conducting. He, however, hinted that the interrogation concerned issues and opinion on which the petitioner had written journalistic pieces and as such it involved the petitioner’s professional work.

That the petitioner was naturally taken aback by the insistence to appear at the FIA Headquarters despite the fact that the petitioner continued to convince the respondent that his professional work was in the public domain and could be accessed without his presence or interrogation.

The petitioner was reluctant to go to the FIA Headquarters due to the apprehension that he is either picked up and disappeared or detained illegally. At the absolute reluctance expressed by the petitioner, Bodla insisted that it would be “better” for him to appear for review of his work and in a threatening voice and tone, questioned the petitioner as to whether he would appear or not.

The petitioner prayed to the court to direct the respondents to carry out their responsibilities and duties in accordance with the law and that they be directed to desist from harassing citizens simply because they have expressed a view or are carrying out their professional duties that are guaranteed under freedom of expression laws.