Courts and the media

THE relationship between the judiciary and the media is by no means an adversarial one, though it can become so, if either side exceeds its limits. In India that relationship has become tense in recent decades.
The Supreme Court stretched the limits of the law of contempt and exhibited touchiness. The media did not behave well when it undertook what is called “trial by the press”. In England the trend is the very opposite, a fact which the courts in India fail to notice though the law of contempt is based on English law.
For instance on March 10, 2004 The Times wrote of one of the most distinguished lords Chief Justice Lord Woolf that he could not “quite make up his mind whether he is a liberal reformer or shop steward for the only trade union in the country whose members wear wigs and not hard hats or cloth caps”. It was referring to his opposition to reform of the procedure for the appointment of judges.
Last month, a judgment delivered by a bench of five judges of the Supreme Court of India, gave an odd ruling on the media. The issue was simple. Is it open to the media to disclose the terms being negotiated between a statutory body, the Securities & Exchange Board of India (SEBI), and a private corporation to settle a litigation? The court approximated the negotiations to judicial proceedings and held the disclosure to be in contempt of court.
Counsel for the company had addressed a ‘personal’ letter to counsel for SEBI enclosing proposals. They were confirmed by the advocates on record instructing them. A day prior to the hearing before the Supreme Court, a TV channel flashed details of the proposals. All hell broke loose.
The company alleged that disclosure to the media was in breach of confidentiality, a charge which SEBI denied. In huge public corporations, as in government offices, the source of a leak is hard to detect. What if the media had reported, instead, secret proposals on say, Sir Creek or Siachen? Would the government have prosecuted the newspaper or TV channel for violation of the Official Secrets Act?
Indeed two decades ago a journal in Pakistan published whole texts of drafts on the Wullar Barrage dispute with perfect impunity. This was in the age-old tradition of the press.
But the Supreme Court passed this order. “Such incidents are increasing by the day. Such reporting not only affects the business sentiments but also interferes in the administration of justice. In the above circumstances, we have requested learned counsel on both sides to make written application to this court, so that appropriate orders could be passed by this court with regard to reporting of matters, which are sub-judice.”
The company asked the court that “appropriate guidelines be framed with regard to reporting (in the electronic and print media) of matters which are sub-judice in a court including public disclosure of documents forming part of court proceedings” and “appropriate directions be issued as to the manner and extent of publicity to be given by the print/electronic media of pleadings/documents filed in a proceeding in court which is pending and not yet adjudicated upon”.
There began a series of hearings before the court on the advisability of framing such ‘guidelines’. What emerged mercifully was a limited order. It expounded the law on “the constitutional limitations on free speech” but declined “to enumerate categories of publication amounting to contempt”. The court will examine “the content and context on case to case basis”.
Had this obvious course been adopted at the outset the court’s precious time, spent day after day listening to pleas on the guidelines, would have been saved.
The court said it was relying on an earlier ruling, which has been fully demonstrated by the late H.M. Seervai to be wrong. It was also criticised by M.C. Setalvad, India’s first and most highly respected attorney general.
A judge of the Bombay High Court had passed an oral order in a defamation case that the evidence of a witness should not be published, because it would affect his business. The Supreme Court upheld this in 1966 and followed it in 2012.
The court’s present ruling considered some American cases but overlooked a main one. It was in the Richmond Newspaper case in 1980 when the Supreme Court of the United States ruled: “Instead of acquiring information about trials by first-hand observation or by word of mouth from those who attended, people now acquire it chiefly through the print and electronic media.
In a sense, this validates the media claim of functioning as surrogates for the public. While media representatives enjoy the same right of access as the public, they often are provided special seating and priority of entry so that they may report what people in attendance have seen and heard.”
The media, judicially recognised as “surrogates of people”, has every right to disclose negotiations between a private company and a state corporation on a matter of public interest. What if in a similar case there is a fear in the public and the media of proposals which harm the public interest?
It is well recognised that a publication which would affect fair trial by a jury of lay persons would have no such effect on judges trained in the law. Most of the rulings were delivered before the Internet technology was invented. To be realistic a very grey zone exists between the citizen’s right to a fair trial and the media — i.e. the citizen’s right to freedom of speech.
It is well settled that the right to justice triumphs in the event of a conflict between the two. The subject deserves a dispassionate debate.
What is not open to question is that the fourth estate is perfectly entitled to, and is indeed duty bound to, oversee and criticise the conduct of each of the other three, the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. Or its part the fourth estate, like the rest, must abide by its limits without betraying its true role in a democracy.
The writer is an author and a lawyer.

THE rate at which certain traditional technologies are being rendered obsolete would, just a few years ago, have been thought impossible. But in many ways, it seems that the future is already upon us.
This year has so far seen the demise of three iconic giants. In January, the company that brought mass amateur photography to the world — Kodak, or the Eastman Kodak Company — filed for bankruptcy under US laws that would allow it to restructure itself.
It may yet manage to save itself from total oblivion, but it seems certain that the Kodak moment is over. This was the firm whose research enabled celluloid film, home videos, print and even digital photography — Kodak, being the pioneer of digital photography but failing to see its immense potential, in a sense died by its own hand.
Then in March, after 244 years of a noble printing tradition, the Encyclopaedia Britannica announced that it would no longer be printing physical copies of the reference books. It would concentrate on the digital version instead.
Over recent years, the print edition — comprising 32 volumes in the last 2010 edition, priced at upwards of $1,000 — accounted for less than one per cent of the company’s revenue. For the online version — which can be constantly updated — the subscription stands at under a couple of dollars.
“We’d like to think our tradition is not print,” said company president Jorge Cauz while announcing the decision, “but to bring scholarly knowledge to people.” Now comes the disclosure that the diminishing year will take with it that venerable staple of homes and offices, Newsweek magazine (the US edition; it still has foreign print licences in Japan, Mexico, Poland, Pakistan and South Korea, and is negotiating two new licences in Asia).
After its establishment in 1933 Newsweek, along with Time, was considered at the forefront of credible news-disseminating organisations. Its circulation peaked in 1991 at 3.3 million. But then, amongst a host of myriad problems, the exigencies of the new, digital, world kicked in. From January, a digital magazine with a paid-for subscription called Newsweek Global will be published.
Where the digital age is threatening traditional methods of news dissemination in the West, here in Pakistan, though, where reality is generally a lot grittier and perhaps more distasteful than in many other countries, the news media are under threat from a different quarter entirely; a sneakier but deadlier, dark-deed-in-the-dark-of-night sort of threat.
Here, we are facing a situation where individuals and organisations are having to ask themselves how direct they can be, how far they can go — how far would it be wise to go? — even when reporting the truth, and nothing but the truth.
The enormity of the significance of the attack on Malala Yousafzai took the focus away from the second specified threat posed by the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan soon after. Reportedly, in a call intercepted by the intelligence agencies, TTP chief Hakeemullah Mehsud gave subordinates “special directions” to attack media houses, apparently because of the very critical coverage of the shooting incident.
That fear tactics do work is clear from Imran Khan’s original statement that he did not wish to name the TTP for their crime against a teenager because that might invite the terrorists’ ire.
It cannot be denied that even other than specific threats the TTP issues against persons or groups, this is generally a society that lives in fear. Can the media, which together appears such a formidable edifice but is at the same time comprised of individuals and assets such as buildings and machinery, be held immune to the general shadow under which everybody lives?
Because the truth of the matter is that even leaving aside a significant and identifiable threat such as the TTP, in the Pakistan of now violence can come from any, even an unexpected, quarter. What the growing extremism in recent years has also meant is that in the national mindset, the gloves have come off; the fight is bare-knuckled and vicious.
From the murders of Salmaan Taseer to Saleem Shahzad and the attempt on Malala’s life, the lesson given out is that calling a spade a spade, true though it may be, can be enough to invite violence. And who stands first in the line of fire than those whose professional obligation it is to bring the truth to light?
I wouldn’t go as far as to say that media people and houses are having to suppress the truth. Not yet. But they are certainly having to consider very carefully their output regarding certain issues, which includes coverage of the extremist and/or religious right, the blasphemy laws and most matters that touch upon religion in any way.
Caveats and disclaimers are added; where the ideal in deciding how hard a stance to take on any issue ought to be the enormity of the issue itself, it is becoming a matter of how far it is possible to go before an attack becomes a certainty.
We are at the brink of losing the hard-won freedom of the press that not just media outlets but the citizenry at large has campaigned so long for. So far, to their great credit, journalists on the frontlines and those arguing the less palatable truths are in general continuing to do their job. But the process of self-censorship in the face of grave risk has seeped in.
The writer is a member of staff.
hajrahmumtaz@gmail.com

__________________
Guide us on the straight path;
the path of those whom You have blessed.

Young men and women who aspire to be journalists in today’s Pakistan, do so for two reasons. One, they studied mass communication because they couldn’t make the merit for more structured disciplines at university, and have figured, honestly, they are not good enough at anything in particular. And two, they have an overwhelming urge to save and serve the world.
The former is a straight forward and understandable reason. You pick a newspaper or watch a news bulletin, and you see mediocrity reigning supreme. Senior reporters can’t fit their five Ws and an H in a feature-length news report; those who do, more often than not get their facts wrong and their figures fudged; hardly anyone knows the language they report in or edit; and when they become seasoned enough, they either start wheeling dealing as media managers or take to writing and talking complete nonsense, with a lot more panache, authority, and freedom than they could muster as reporters.
Surely, I can do better than these jokers, the young job seeker enthuses. Today’s ‘well known journalists’ took the same route, didn’t they? One day they were just a pretty face or a sexy figure, or the son/daughter of a showbiz person, or a misfit civil servant, or a rude and belligerent angry-old-man, or a smooth and slippery charlatan … and the next day they are presenting news, hosting a current affairs programme or analysing a complex event or situation. That makes me qualified too – I can talk the talk and walk the walk. In fact, if I don’t stand a chance in journalism, I don’t stand a chance anywhere.
This line of thinking smacks of opportunism but is in fact as realistic as it gets. And the proof of its being real is in the fact that young people who don’t know any better do keep joining the circus, becoming the jokers, and in turn, attracting more wannabes to follow them. It’s the natural circle of life in Pakistani journalism. Those who are lucky and crafty enough, get a fat salary and fringe benefits that are restricted only by their own imagination, while the rest slog off on pittance, or no salary at all, waiting for their chance to strike gold.
The latter reason is more devious and therefore should be alarming for media consumers and media managers alike. Those who enter journalism to ‘reform’ the society in the image of this philosophy or that, are like the young lad who joins the army so that he can become a general, take over the government, and fix all the ills of his beloved homeland. They have the sincerity of purpose of a 16-year-old’s, and an intelligence level to match. These juvenile do-gooders come in handy as fodder for various ideologies grazing the landscape of this nation.
There are right-wing ideologues who see God and Satan in every conflict, left-wing whiners who are always on the side of the oppressed but are never quite sure who the oppressed are, nationalists who insist on reinventing the wheel as a Pakistani invention for it to roll in Pakistan, and liberals who reject everything without putting forward anything new. These journalists too attract their own kind and form theother circle of journalistic life.
Between the intellectually challenged and ideologically motivated journalists – who together define the Pakistani brand of journalism – there exist a few meticulous reporters who write for people, write well, make fewer factual mistakes and are very cautious in their editorial judgment; brilliant copy editors who turn a rag tag compilation of information into a juicy story; creative photo journalists who tell a complicated story simply through the selection of their angle, and sharp editors who guide their teams into doing stories others can’t see. They are a part of every news media organisation but they are few and they remain faceless. Their names will not come up even once when you ask a thousand, or ten thousand newspaper readers and news TV viewers, who in their opinion are professionally competent journalists. And therefore, no one aspires to be them.
Pakistani journalism, as unleashed by a military ruler, repackaged by semi-literate media owners, and meekly accepted by senior editors, is no more about informing, educating and entertaining the audience. It’s all about acquiring and expanding a power base and selling a particular point of view, which incidentally, are the two defining traits of politicians as well. And it’s no coincidence. Media owners and senior editors have always been a part of partisan politics and senior journalists who speak and write non-stop on political developments have little or no understanding of the issues that really matter for all Pakistanis, clean drinking water for instance. Every senior journalist is by default a political analyst and the more ambitious of them do turn into full time politicians. Hussain Haqqani, Maleeha Lodhi, Mushahid Hussain, Ayaz Amir, Nafeesa Shah, Shafqat Mahmood … stand out in the present crop of journalists-turned-politicians.
So mixed up is journalism with politics, especially in the mind of old school vernacular journalists, that a senior, presidential award winning columnist recently counted his professional achievements in these words: ‘I was writing columns for (dailies) Shahab and Musawat. Bhutto sahib deputed me to the election campaign of PPP candidates in and around Lyalpur. I used to attend all the public meetings, and people from those days may remember that nature used me as a speaker (at election rallies) too’. Any student of journalism today will be stunned by the fact that the admission is made with pride, not shame. That’s how twisted things are.
Are they getting better? No chance, not at least in the near future because there is no economic incentive for media owners to purge journalism of unprofessional and unethical practices. And not even the senior most editors have the capacity to train and mentor juniors, if they were asked to. The top layer of our contemporary journalists spent their working life, alternately accommodating and fighting the draconian provisions of censorship laws. And when this generation did get the freedom – ironically at the hands of a serving army general – they did not know what to do with freedom. They’d only fought for principles and ethics; they never got to practice them.
That confusion and inaction on the part of senior editors at the turn of the millennium, spelled death for the powerful office of the editor – practically in electronic media and theoretically in print. It is this powerless, directionless editor who became the role model of my generation, and who is now passing on professional mediocrity to the next generation.
You still want to break into journalism? By all means. But do get your preferences right. If your motivation is one or both mentioned above, you know the drill. If you want to do for-people and ethical journalism, learn the ropes in a professional environment before sending your resume to a mainstream Pakistani media house, because you’ll get a job, a salary if you are lucky, but you won’t get any learning.

Masud Alam is an Islamabad-based writer, columnist and journalism trainer. He can be reached at masudalam@yahoo.com

__________________
Guide us on the straight path;
the path of those whom You have blessed.

Being the largest telecommunication company, PTCL has always been determined to stay on top of emerging telecom trends and technologies. A trendsetter for other companies in Pakistan, PTCL is once again in the news with its new product ¬– Pakistan’s First Wi-Fi enabled USB Dongle – EVO Wingle, that connects five Wi-Fi enabled devices simultaneously at a speed of up to 9.3 Mbps.
Unlike PTCL’s Tenda Routers and Nitro Wi-Fi Cloud, EVO Wingle is a USB Wi-Fi device, which can get connected through any power source to create a Wi-Fi hotspot for internet sharing on all Wi-Fi enabled devices in the area.
But after introducing devices that do not require USB connection, why has PTCL introduced a USB enabled device? It doesn’t seem to offer anything different from Nitro Wi-fi Cloud other than going backward on technology where a user must have a USB power source like a Laptop or any external USB power source in order to use their EVO Wingle device. There is no improvement on speed as well because when multiple devices are connected to any dongle, the promised speed is never actually met.
The only difference PTCL states is that EVO Wingle is designed in a way that it is capable of detecting both EVO and Nitro networks of PTCL. It means that if you are in an area where Nitro 9.3 Mbps speed network is not available, the device will connect to EVO 3.1 Mbps speed network and allow you to surf the internet smoothly.
According to Executive Vice President (EVP) Wireless, Omer Khalid, “PTCL has specially taken this initiative so that our valued customers can work play and surf on the go”.
But EVO Wingle is not a novelty if Nitro Wi-fi can also provide the same benefits. In fact, Nitro may be a better option as it doesn’t need a USB power source. What if you’re in a public space and need to use the internet? Would you have to carry your laptop all around or look for an external USB power source? You’d rather carry your EVO or Nitro Wifi Cloud device and use your Internet a lot more conveniently on the go.
Whether you use it at home or outside, this device may have made a difference had it been introduced before Nitro – but definitely not after

Unlike the Servis jingle where rhyming was at least catchy, the jingle for EVO Wingle is completely uninspiring. Specially the part ‘Jo Wingle karta hai, woh mingle karta hai, Aur jo mingle karta hai woh Wingle Wingle Wingle…’ makes Wingle sound like a space filler word that was used because they ran out of words to rhyme.
I use EVO Wi-fi Cloud device myself which claims to offer speed of up to 3.1 Mbps. Obviously, that never happens but it still works at a decent speed most of the time, except when I’m downloading or streaming from two or more devices simultaneously. At that point I’m sure even a dial-up network would work better.
The average internet connection speed in Pakistan in the fourth quarter of 2011 (Sept-Dec) stood at 741kbps, slightly lower than 763kbps recorded in the third quarter, according to Akamai’s quarterly report State of the Internet. Which is a shame as compared to the Global Internet Speed in the first quarter of 2012.
PTCL has been doing great for itself and doesn’t need such filler campaigns to keep it going. In fact if the company wants to remain on top of the telecom industry, it should look into improving internet connection speed in Pakistan when multiple devices are connected to a particular device. They seem to be aiming towards that goal but going back on improving speed on USB devices may not be the smartest way because Cloud devices are now not only becoming very common but are also more convenient to use outdoor.
Maybe the next step is a Cloud device with a steady 12.3 Mbps speed (at least), which you can charge in the car as well or maybe it comes with a portable charger (like the iPhone portable charger), so you don’t easily run out of battery on your device and can recharge when required, without having to worry about looking for a socket.
Sounds like a step forward?

The writer is a New Media Design Manager at Dawn.com

__________________
Guide us on the straight path;
the path of those whom You have blessed.

In the history of the country, never have so many retired generals been in the dock or been talked about this much in the media at the same time for their past deeds and misdeeds. The scenario is made more eye-brow raising by the fact that the list of generals under media scrutiny include a former chief of army staff and two ex director-generals of the Inter-Services Intelligence (DG ISI).
The current times are clearly unprecedented, and needless to say, the development has incensed the incumbent top military leadership.
On November 5, General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani passed a very public statement stressing the need for all state institutions to work within their constitutional limits. Many also interpreted his words as an implied warning against media trial of army officers both serving and retired.
In any case, his statement is thought to have emboldened the accused generals, who have stepped up their defence.
Deliberated attempts have been made to resuscitate their images as over the last fortnight or so, the generals have appeared on television and approached print media journalists with documentary evidence in their favour. Others are writing regular emails to clarify their position in relevant cases.
However, the common theme to their defence seems to be that as army men they were subservient to the civilian leadership, and simply carried out orders issued by the relevant governments.
For instance, former army chief General Aslam Beg in a detailed interview with a private television put the entire blame of the army’s involvement in politics on late Zulfikar Ali Bhutto who in 1975 established the ISI cell in the Presidency.
On the ISI-Islami Jamhoori Ittehad (IJI) saga of 1990 general elections, General Beg, without going into details, claimed he only followed lawful command of the then late President Ghulam Ishaq.
“How could I refuse orders of the supreme commander of the armed forces (President Ishaq),” snapped General Beg, when the host of a TV talk show questioned the involvement of army in politics under his command.
Gen Beg even claimed that the army’s role in politics had legal cover until October 19, 2012, when the Supreme Court cancelled the ISI cell in the Presidency.
Visibly perturbed over how the media was grilling them, Gen Beg retorted: “You (media) people are hurting the institution of army.”
If this was not enough to warn the government, media and judiciary, Gen Beg predicted rolling back of the entire system, if “the trial of the former military officers continued in the public domain.”
Similarly, former DG ISI General Asad Durrani, who along with Gen Beg has been declared guilty of distributing money among IJI politicians in the 1990 elections, has put up a strong defence during his television appearances.
Gen Durrani too argues that Ghulam Ishaq Khan was the brains behind the scheme of things.
In a recent interview, Gen Durrani said that since President Ishaq and Army Chief General Beg were fully on board with regard to distribution of funds among certain politicians, he as DG ISI could only follow their orders and handed over the money to the selected politicians.
Three other generals – Lt-Gen Khalid Munir Khan, Lt-Gen M. Afzal Muzaffar, Maj-Gen Khalid Zaheer Akhtar – in the headlines for the Rs2 billion loss that the National Logistic Cell (NLC) incurred between 2004 and 2008 too claim they were simply toeing the line.
The three accused generals have approached the media with documentary evidence showing they had worked according to the policy laid down by Mr Aziz’s government to invest in the stock exchange, which eventually led to the colossal loss.
The three retired generals were recently re-instituted to face a military court trial, after being found guilty of corruption and irregularities in investments by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the National Assembly. The GHQ is yet to conclude its inquiry report.
Meanwhile, in a completely separate case, another former ISI chief, General Javed Ashraf Qazi is busy writing emails in his defence as the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) investigates his role in the controversial lease of Pakistan Railway (PR) land in Lahore.
General Qazi and two other retired generals, Lt General (retired) Saeeduz Zafar and Major General (retired) Hassan Butt, who were office-bearers in PR, have been accused of leasing 150 acres of PR land in Lahore to a private party on much cheaper rates as compared to the open market.
General Qazi argues that as former minister for railways, he only put railway land into commercial use, which had brought monetary benefits to the cash-strapped Pakistan Railways.
“The golf course was earlier under the use of a handful of railway officers, which is now generating billions of rupees for the PR,” he insists.
The openness with which the generals are approaching the media is a turn around from their stiff attitudes. Earlier, the same generals would have gotten away by avoiding all talk of the cases It is clear that the military establishment has realised that the changed dynamics and the new reality of the media in the country.
khawar.ghumman@gmail.com

__________________
Guide us on the straight path;
the path of those whom You have blessed.

Thank you so much

__________________
Don't hate ,it's too big a burden to bear...

Dear friends i need help in filling online form i m over 28 years of age and i m a govt servant i want to aply the prob is that online form only shows the date and year starting from 1985 and i m bit older than that so plz help me i m waiting for ur precious replies...my cell no is 03002728836