Low Graphics Site
White bar
.: Latest News :. .: News in Pictures :.
Dawn e-paper
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Horoscope Recipes Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker



Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Weather

FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Ayaz Irfan Hussain Jawed Naqvi Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story


June 09, 2007 Saturday Jamadi-ul-Awwal 23, 1428






Notices issued in Pemra case



By Our Staff Reporter


KARACHI, June 8: A division bench of the Sindh High Court issued notices to the federal and provincial attorneys and the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra)’s chairman on Friday in a petition challenging the Pemra ordinance.

The petition had been moved by Sindh Bar Council members Salahuddin Gandapur and Mohammad Aqil through Advocate Mustafa Lakhani.

The bench, comprising Justices Amir Hani Muslim and Munib Ahmed Khan, at first granted an application for its urgent hearing and then referring to the office objection, asked the petitioners and their counsel how they were aggrieved by the promulgation of the amended Pemra ordinance.

Advocate Mustafa Lakhani said lawyers had launched a campaign for the reinstatement of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry that was widely being covered by the electronic media. He said the coverage had offended the government and the new ordinance was aimed at blacking out the lawyers’ campaign.

The bench decided to rule on the office objection later and issued preadmission notices for June 27.

Asked how the ordinance impinged on the freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed under article 19 of the Constitution, the SBC members said the newly-inserted provisions empowered the Pemra to seal offices and equipment of TV channels. It also authorised it to frame new rules under the ordinance. The provisions suffered from excessive delegation of authority.






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2007