LAHORE: Lahore High Court (LHC) has linked any proceedings under Punjab’s new defamation law to its final verdict on the petition challenging the law.

During the hearing on Tuesday, LHC’s Justice Muhammad Amjad Rafiq also issued notices to the attorney general, Punjab advocate general, and the provincial government to submit their replies.

The court was hearing challenges to the Punjab Defamation Act 2024 filed by journalists Riaz Ahmad Raja and Jaffar Ahmad Yar.

The petitioners’ lawyer Advo­cate Nadeem Sarwar argued the law was against the independence of judiciary and freedom of expression.

Petitioners’ lawyer questions how govt could overrule LHC CJ’s suggestions for judges appointment to tribunal

He pointed out that, according to the law, the chief justice can propose three judges to form a tribunal for the trial of the accused, but the government can reject the names and request new ones.

He argued that as per the rules, the chief justice’s proposals cannot be rejected and must be implemented by the government.

The lawyer argued that the Act empowered the government to propose names of judges for the tribunal, from which the chief justice could select one, which was against the rules.

The government cannot interfere in judicial matters, Advocate Sarwar argued.

Justice Rafiq observed that tribunals operate under the government’s purview and not judicial, similar to service and banking tribunals.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that under the Act, the government would determine the tribunal’s member salary and other conditions, which were against judicial independence.

The judge asked the lawyer how the defamation law violated the freedom of expression and fundamental rights.

Advocate Sarwar explained that according to the law, legal proceedings can be initiated without any evidence.

He further pointed out that as per the law, a defendant must pay a fine of Rs3 million even before the case is decided by the tribunal.

Opposing the petition, an additional advocate general stated that the government and LHC recently held consultations regarding the appointment of judges in special courts.

He added the process was the same as provided under the defamation law.

The judge remarked that if the chief justice sent some recommendations, the government cannot reject it on grounds that a particular minister did not like the names.

“This is not a business transaction or trading,” Justice Rafiq maintained.

He noted that the petitioner’s lawyer questioned how the tribunal could be formed and what was meant by consultation between the government and the LHC chief justice.

Later, the judge turned down the petitioners’ counsel’s request to grant a stay order on the law but declared any proceedings under the law would be subject to the court’s decision.

The judge then adjourned the hearing and directed the law officer to submit comments on behalf of the respondents by the next hearing.

The two journalists’ petition has challenged the law on grounds that it was “in sheer violation” of the fundamental rights protected in the Constitution.

They pleaded that instead of drafting a new law, the government should have amended existing laws.

The petition added that the law had been introduced in haste without consulting journalists, and it aimed to control the media.

The definition of “journalist” and “newspaper” provided in the law was “vague, irrational and ambiguous”. Separately, the Lahore Press Club, through its President Arshad Ansari, has also filed a petition against the law.

Published in Dawn, June 12th, 2024