Case Update Status

Islamabad High Court allowed limited journalists for coverage

Summary of Case

On August 30, court reporters from different television channels, including 92 News reporter Saqib Bashir, Asad Ullah Malik, and others, were barred from covering the hearing of the £190m corruption case referred to the special court set up inside Adiala Jail. According to The Express Tribune, only five journalists were allowed access to the proceedings, while eight to ten others were stopped outside the prison by the jail authorities. As per the report, journalists covering the beat had also lodged protests against the “inappropriate behavior of the jail authorities.” They had also filed petitions in court challenging the restrictions placed on their coverage. Speaking to PPF, Geo TV court reporter Shabbir Dar said that it is common practice of the TV channels that they often change their reporter in particular cases to avoid hassle by the administration or authorities. However, some reporters were not restricted nor dropped by the organization anyhow, that was questionable, he added. The writ petition was filed before the Islamabad High Court by journalists including Saqib Bashir, Sami Ibrahim and others. He stressed that the majority reporters were from the Islamabad High Court Reporters’ Association, as the bench set up for hearing came from the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), and reporters from Rawalpindi usually avoid such political beats and do not get involved in matters leading procession and disturbance as reporting are their bread and butter and the authorities are in power. He added that no statement and condemnation was released by any organization and union of journalists. Speaking to PPF, 92 News reporter Saqib Bashir stated that he was the one who barred from covering the proceeding of Imran Khan case and then he filed a petition for permission by the court however, the order of the court was not complied. A meeting was held to resolve the issue and to set the SOPs of reporting between the management of Adiala Jail and seven members of Islamabad High Court Reporters Association, however, he was again delimited from reporting. After that, a contempt of court was filed before the Islamabad High Court and some other journalists were arrayed as the petitioner and he was allowed to cover the news. Speaking to PPF ARY News reporter, Jahangir Aslam said that the reporters were restricted from the first hearing of the case however, the Islamabad High Court allowed them for reporting on the petition filed by a journalist. In response to the order, the deputy superintendent of the Adila Jail said that the jail does not have the capacity to fix number of journalist reporters however, they promised only limited reporters from 20 broadcasting channels and print media. Nevertheless, later they allowed only few of them. He further said that the jail management typically requests the channels to change the reporters to maintain decorum. He added that as the organizations require good performances and expect hassle free reporting so, the reporters should also maintain the decorum of the premises especially in the government institutions and should avoid delicate questioning while covering high- profile political cases. He further stressed that not only in the particular £190m corruption case but in all cases, the Islamabad High Court raise questions on the presence of reporters and typically halt them from reporting. According to Express Tribune, journalists have faced barriers to reporting on the trial, leading to protests against the inappropriate behavior of jail authorities. On August 23, the Islamabad High Court ruled that journalist should not be permitted to interview Imran Khan during his trial at the jail. However, the court expressed concerns about the legality of the broader restrictions on media coverage. Justice Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb emphasized that while trial court judges have the authority to regulate courtroom proceedings and manage disruptions, it is not within the remit of the jail administration to impose such restrictions on media coverage, The Express Tribune reported. In the petition filed by Asad Ullah Malik (Writ petition No.80 of 2024), the court ordered dated 11.01.2024 that “the petitioner is a journalist and he is a member of Islamabad High Court Journalists Association. The grievance of the petitioner is that he and some other journalists have not been granted access to the jail trials conducted against Mr. Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi, and contended that Adila Jail administration was giving access to a particular class of journalists, which is in violation of the fundamental rights as enshrined in the Constitution and also is contradictory to the concept of open trial as provided in section 352 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In the order the notice was issues to the Adila Jail administration to question the matter.” (A copy of the order is attached here.) Following the petition, the Islamabad High Court ordered dated 16.01.2024, the court fixed the matter on the basis of the meeting was held with the Superintendent Jail, Adiala, and as an interim arrangement, seven journalists of the Islamabad High Court Journalists Association were allowed to attend the proceedings at Central Jail, Adiala. In the contempt of court proceeding, the order dated 22.08.2024 settled that that as an interim arrangement that was arrived at between the journalists of the Islamabad High Court Journalists Association and the Superintendent, Central Jail Adiala, Rawalpindi to the effect that seven journalists would be allowed to attend the jail proceedings/trial. However the xx [who said?] said the order had not been complied with as yet. Mr. Waqi-uz-Zaman, Assistant Superintendent, Central Jail Adiala, Rawalpindi submitted that certain journalists disrupt the jail proceedings as during such proceedings, they conduct interviews with the accused. It is for the respective courts and their presiding officers to regulate the proceedings. However, the order established that the Superintendent, Central Jail Adiala, Rawalpindi, remains bound by his commitment to allow seven journalists to attend the legal proceedings and make arrangements so that the security measures are completed prior to the commencement of the proceedings. Saqib Bashir, Journalist, (Petitioner in the same matter) had drawn the attention of the Court to letter dated 02.08.2024, whereby his entry in the Central Jail Adiala for the purpose of reporting had been restricted. He submitted that he shall not disrupt the jail proceedings while reporting and shall ensure the decorum of the Court. Therefore, the Central Jail Adiala, Rawalpindi shall permit him to attend the jail proceedings if he is one of the seven journalists. The Islamabad High Court ordered to allow limited journalist as decided in the meeting between the journalists of the Islamabad High Court Journalists Association and the Superintendent, Central Jail Adiala.

Category of Incident

Journalists barred from covering court proceedings for a case in Adiala Jail.

ICCS Status

ICCS Divisions: N/A

ICCS Group: N/A

ICCS Class: N/A

ICCS Crime: N/A

Reported By

N/A

Date of incident

30

Month

August

Year

2024

Name of affected person

Journalists covering Adiala Jail proceedings of case

Other affected persons

N/A

Name of affected organization

N/A

Other affected organizations

N/A

Action by

N/A

City

Rawalpindi

Province

Punjab

Designation

Court Reporters

Professional category

Reporters

Age of victim

N/A

Marital Status

Compensation Details

Amount of compensation announced by government: N/A

Date of compensation announcement by government: N/A

Date of compensation paid by government: N/A

Amount of compensation announced by others: N/A

Date of compensation announced by others: N/A

Date compensation paid by others: N/A

FIR Details

Was FIR registered ?: No

Court Details

Was case investigated ?: No

Court where case was presented: Islamabad High Court

Name of prosecuting lawyer: N/A

Date of first court hearing:

Date of last court hearing:

Status of court case: N/A

Journalist Union Status

PFUJ

No version was recorded

APNS

No version was recorded

CPNE

No version was recorded

PBA

No version was recorded

Media Source Status

Media reports:

Condemn Status

Colleague of victim

No version was recorded

Employer organization

No version was recorded

Press Club Status

Press club 1: No version was recorded

Press club 2: No version was recorded

Press club 3: No version was recorded