Question of rights
Freedom of expression is a fundamental right. Though this right is violated in autocratic governments and dictatorships, all functioning democracies have a mechanism to defend this right without which no civilized society commands respect of the global community in the 21st century. The UN recognizes this right as enshrined in its declaration of human rights. However, a new legislation is on the cards in the country – ostensibly in the name of respect for the armed forces of the country. The bill –approved by a National Assembly standing committee – seeks to amend the PPC to send anyone to jail for two years or fine them for Rs500, 000 or both, if that person tries to defame the army. The opposition parties, the Pakistan Bar Council, and some other civil society activists and organizations have demanded withdrawal of the bill.
There are already existing defamation laws that offer plenty of coverage to any individual or organization if it feels defamed or disrespected. In fact, the NA standing committee should have known that Section 500 of the PPC is clear about providing punishment for the defamation of anyone – be it an individual or an organization. Now the new bill proposes the addition of Section 500-A, the sole aim of which appears to be gagging freedom of expression which is already under threat from various quarters in the country. The constitution guarantees this freedom which should not be curtailed in the name of national security.
The armed forces have, through the history of Pakistan, done a great deal to defend the country against both internal and external threats. By acting in this fashion, they have won respect from the people and praise from many quarters. Which is why such laws are also against the integrity of a much-respected institution. The purpose of all legislation is essentially to protect and respect the rights of citizens and all institutions are legally bound to do so. It is not a good idea to protect impunity under various disguises. The constitutional domains of all institutions are clearly defined and, given the long history of anti-political interference and interventions in the country, the right to criticize and pinpoint transgressions and violations of the constitution must remain intact
-
Miley Cyrus Reveals 'terrible' Habit She Learned From Dolly Parton -
Prince Harry Urged To Be ‘less Glossy’ After Netflix Snub -
Demi Lovato Reveals Why One Aspect Of Wedding Planning Felt 'intimidating' -
King Charles Rolls Out Royal Treatment With Lavish State Banquet For Nigeria's President -
Zendaya Reveals Her Go-to Wedding Vibe Amid Tom Holland Marriage Rumors -
Timothée Chalamet Faces Huge 'snub' From 'Dune 3' Team At Trailer Launch -
Miley Cyrus Spills How Father Billy Ray Became On-screen Dad On ‘Hannah Montana’ -
Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Face Scathing Response From Author Tom Bower -
Americans' Credit Applications Rise To Highest Level Since October 2022: Says New Fed Report -
Prince Harry Heartbreak As King Charles Ruled Out Favourite Job -
One Direction Member Reveals He Always Hated Singing 'What Makes You Beautiful' -
Robert Pattinson Surprising Relationship Hint About Suki Waterhouse Grabs Attention -
King Charles Gives Nigerian First Couple Rare Access To Royal Collection -
TrumpRx Lists Many Medicines At Prices Higher Than Paid In UK, Report Says -
Meghan Markle Gets Special Help In New Project -
Who Are Dolores Huerta Children After She Revealed Two Secret Pregnancies With César Chávez?