Amicus curiae: IHC seeks opinion on new social media rules
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday appointed amicus curiae and sought their opinion on new social media rules till January 6.
The court appointed Sadaf Baig, Nighat Daad, Fareeha Aziz, Rafay Baloch, Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) and Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) as amicus curiae in above case. The bench said it would view whether these rules were contradicting with Constitution or not.
Additional Attorney General Qasim Wadood told the bench that Attorney General of Pakistan Khalid Javed had consulted several stakeholders in light of the directions of this court. The prime minister, he said, had constituted a committee headed by Federal Minister Shireen Mazari, which held consultations with more than 30 stakeholders including Facebook, twitter, google and others.
Chief Justice Athar Minallah observed that how an authority could do moral policing. The Tik Tok had been blocked for a long time, he said. The additional attorney general said Tik Tok had been restored again.
To this the chief justice said it was not a fun we have to move under the law. The chief justice remarked that institutions were misusing powers under PECA Act. He questioned whether the new rules were made according to international standards.
The petitioner’s lawyer said there were several objections on the new social media rules. Justice Minallah asked whether it would be right to block the whole social media application on basis of few controversial contents. He said that blocking social media application on some contentious contents is not a solution.
The additional attorney general said according to his information the same way was being adopted in several countries including Australia, European Union and others. Under the new rules, the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) was given authority to identify the contempt of court contents.
The court asked whether he knew the difference between freedom of expression and contempt of court. Justice Minallah remarked a criticism on a judge didn’t fall under contempt of court. The petitioner’s lawyer said the rules were finalised only after two meeting. How it could meet international standards, he said. The court adjourned further hearing till January 6, with above instructions.
-
Inside Dylan Efron's First 'awful' Date With Girlfriend Courtney King -
'Sugar' Season 2: Colin Farrell Explains What Lies Ahead After THAT Plot Twist -
‘Revolting’ Sarah Ferguson Crosses One Line That’s Sealed Her Fate As Well As Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s -
AI Rivalry Heats Up As Anthropic Targets OpenAI In Super Bowl Ad -
Kate Middleton, Prince William Share Message Ahead Of Major Clash -
Is Dark Matter Real? New Theory Proposes It Could Be Gravity Behaving Strangely -
Viral AI Caricature Trend: Is Your Personal Data Really Safe? -
Lil Jon’s Late Son, Nathan Smith Spoke Highly Of His Father Before His Tragic Death -
China Boosts Reusable Spacecraft Capabilities By Launching For The Fourth Time -
Bianca Censori On Achieving 'visibility Without Speech': 'I Don't Want To Brag' -
'Concerned' Prince Harry Future Plans For Lilibet, Archie Exposed -
Skipping Breakfast? Here Are Some Reasons Why You Shouldn't -
Billie Eilish Slammed For Making Political Speech At Grammys -
Beverley Callard Announces Her Cancer Diagnosis: 'Quite Nervous' -
WhatsApp May Add Instagram Style Close Friends For Status Updates -
Winter Olympics Officially Open In Milan, Cortina With Historic Dual Cauldron Lighting