The issues of freedom of expression and media regulation are in the news once again in Pakistan. Is that because it is in the nature of the beast to be so? Not entirely. Unlike Pakistan, governments and media outlets elsewhere in the world seem to have bridged broad differences and have, instead, arrived at a set of self imposed regulations.

Here in Pakistan, the question still remains what should be the structure of broadcast media regulation in Pakistan? Pemra is at the heart of the debate. There is a sense that Pemra needs to redefine its mission statement "to reflect the dramatically changed realities of the Pakistani media landscape and the fact that its current mission and mechanism predates 85 per cent of the current-day media". A more pertinent question is why is Pemra so hated by the sector it regulates? Whose interest is it supposed to protect and whose has it come to serve in its first 12 years -- how to improve representation on its board to make it a friend of both the citizens and the sector, freedom of expression, etc.

An interesting aspect that Adnan Rehmat has pointed out in his article is regarding the presence of a conflict between the regulators and the regulated in the presence of so many regulators for both the print and the electronic media.

In today’s Special Report, we have focused on the Pakistan Broadcasting Association, how can it offset the pressure from the security establishment and how can it become more public interest oriented.

A brilliant effort has been made in this regard in the recommendations made by by the Media Commission formed at the behest of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Javed Jabbar, a member of this Media Commission talks at length about all these issues in an exclusive interview.

There are, of course, other issues like restoring journalism by editors, code of ethics, defamation laws and the benefits of DTH and the influential cable operators. Here’re some suggestions about how the structure of media regulation should look like.