Justice abroad?

The 275,000 pounds in damages and legal costs awarded to business magnate Mian Muhammad Mansha by a court in London after he was falsely accused of money laundering by news channel ARY should serve as a reminder that falsehood may cost. As encouraging as it is that justice has been done, this case can also be seen as a sad comment on media regulation and the courts in Pakistan. That a Pakistani citizen had to seek justice in a British court against a news channel owned by Pakistanis shows how little confidence there is in our system. The said channel is licensed by Pemra and primarily broadcasts in Pakistan. The Pemra Ordinance 2002 clearly lays out punishments for defamatory content. We can only wonder why Pemra so often fails to prevent news channels from defaming citizens. After all, the British court has found exactly the same content to be defamatory and devoid of any ground. Some of Pemra’s moves had raised hopes in the recent past that its performance would get better. Even though the channel under question has a history of libel and it is not the first time it has lost a case of this kind in the UK, it is far from being the only channel that has turned libel and defamation into a habit. The situation in Pakistan is dangerous. In the past few years, we have seen countless examples of talk show hosts ruining reputations, which is also a violation of Article 4 of the constitution. They endangered lives and in some cases clearly incited violence against individuals and groups. False accusations of blasphemy have been routinely levelled at political opponents and ‘rivals’ in the media industry – something which in our current environment equals a death sentence. The victims have also included writers, journalists, artists and other citizens. They were targeted on ‘religious’ or ‘patriotic’ grounds, and they were targeted by scoundrels. In some such cases Pemra imposed fines on news channels and even ordered talk show hosts who regularly defame others to be taken off the air. But these news channels, in almost all cases, managed to get the decisions overturned or have stay orders issued – no matter how gravely rotten their actions were. It is here that we face a much more serious problem.

We note that while those who pursue libel cases here end up getting stuck for years as well-resourced defamers drag the cases out forever, hundreds of more such cases can be filed against one person to target and torment them when there are few signs that cases will reach a conclusion. There is the unfortunate impression that, in matters such as this, our legal system only looks after its own and trying to go through the courts is nothing but a waste of money and time. All this creates an atmosphere of threat and harassment. Not everyone has the resources to pursue justice in a foreign country. The only real recourse for the Pakistani people is our own legal system and it is here that they remain most vulnerable. All the laws that are needed to protect people against being defamed already exist. An effective media regulatory body needs independence, the strength of other institutions and an empowered judicial system behind it. In today’s Pakistan, the onus is on the courts to be more responsive to cases involving libel and defamation. The wider society too has a duty to stop patronising organisations that make a habit of defamation. The media freedom we have today is precious and was won through the sacrifices of many. A few rotten actors should not be allowed to trample on that freedom with their gross irresponsibility.