Islamabad, 28 June 2024, (GNP): The Supreme Court (SC), accepted the apologies from Senator Faisal Vawda and Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P) lawmaker Mustafa Kamal, thereby withdrawing the contempt of court notices issued to them.
On Wednesday, Vawda offered an unconditional apology to the Supreme Court in the contempt case, stating that he was leaving his fate in the hands of the apex court. Earlier this month, Kamal also sought an unconditional apology for his comments against the judiciary.
As per the court’s order, delivered by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, both parliamentarians acknowledged that the language they had used was inappropriate.
“They have now withdrawn their statement and tendered an unconditional apology to the court,” read the order, adding that the court withdrew the show-cause notices issued to the politicians in view of their reflection on the matter.
During the hearing, the chief justice remarked: “In Article 66 — freedom of speech to speak in the Parliament — of the Constitution, you can stand up and speak in the parliament.”
Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa instructed both politicians to “exercise caution in the future” when discussing the judiciary. He emphasized, “We respect you and hope you respect us. Mutual disrespect harms the public.” He also reminded Vawda and Kamal that Article 66 protects lawmakers’ speech within Parliament, not outside it.
The Supreme Court’s decision came more than a month after issuing contempt of court notices to both politicians on May 17. This action followed their strong criticisms of the judiciary during press conferences in Islamabad, where Vawda stated allegations should not be made without evidence, and Kamal advocated for ethical standards among judges, asserting that justice should not be influenced.
Their remarks came after six Islamabad High Court judges wrote to Supreme Judicial Council members, alleging interference by intelligence agencies in judicial matters. The politicians also raised concerns about the dual citizenship of an IHC judge. The Supreme Court responded promptly with a suo motu notice against them.
“We, however, expect that they stand by their statements submitted in courts because if there is further transgression, a simple apology may then not be acceptable to this court,” stated the order.
The order further stated: “Even if we assumed that the documents that have been filed are replies to the notices, the said television channels have justified their broadcast of the said press conferences, despite the fact that during the hearing, Faisal Siddiqui conceded that the contents of one of the press conference did prima facie constitute contempt.”
Also Read: UNIDO hosts high-level workshop to strengthen food regulatory practices in Pakistan
Thus, the court noted the defenses presented: (a) that a television channel is not accountable for what it airs if it originates from another source, (b) that contempt requires malicious intent, and (c) that airing such content is their right and duty.
However, the court deemed these explanations not prima facie justifiable and proceeded to issue show-cause notices to those who had submitted these responses. It also decided to issue contempt notices to channels that had not responded, questioning why they should not be held in contempt for rebroadcasting or airing portions of the contentious press conferences without apologies.
During the hearing, the court had asked whether the TV channels had aired any apologies, but none had been provided. The court emphasized that since channels are commercial entities earning from broadcasts, they should also disclose whether the press conferences were preceded by advertisements, the number of ads aired, the revenue generated, and details thereof following the conclusion of each conference.
