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.
-
Real Motive Of Netflix Behind Giving Harry, Meghan Another Chance Laid Bare -
Prince Edward, Duchess Sophie Forced To Find New Place As Andrew Comes In Way -
Kate Middleton Aide Spills ‘frustrating’ Part Of Her Job -
Savannah Guthrie Airs Heartbreaking Easter Message As Mom Nancy Remains Missing For Over Month -
Jennifer Aniston's Latest Romance Impacting Bond With 'Friends' Cast -
Princess Beatrice, Eugenie Ultimate Confusion Over King Charles Spilt -
'Landman' Viral Scene Explains The Oil Crisis Fast -
Inside Katie Holmes' 'low-key' Life In NYC After Dropping Out Of Spotlight -
Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Receive Key Advice On New Netflix Show -
Tamzin Outhwaite Reflects On 'long Journey' As She Marks Major Evolution As A Mum -
Hailee Steinfeld, Josh Allen Make Surprise Outing After Baby Girl Arrival: 'Having A Blast' -
Can Meghan Markle Turn As Ever Into Solo Success? -
RAYE Reflects On Regaining Power After Shunning Label System For Good -
'Harry Potter' Star Bonnie Wright Shares Major Family Milestone With Husband Andrew Lococo -
Major Bill In The Works To Save Dozens Of Hero Dogs -
Maury Povich Reacts To 'gold Diggers' Allegations After Marrying 'rich' Wife Connie Chung