Regulating Agendas

Since its inception, PEMRA has been known to engage in arm-twisting of media houses & journalists

PEMRA is a regulatory body established with the goal of evolving and promoting a dynamic, objective, and responsible electronic media environment. free of influences and biases. However, a review of PEMRA’s history and decisions reveals that it is being used by ruling governments to silence independent and opposing voices in politics and the media, as well as to shut down popular news channels.

Despite the fact that PEMRA appears to be an independent and autonomous body, its successive chairmen proved too pliant and weak to withstand government pressure and made decisions that exceeded their legal jurisdiction.

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) recently lifted a Pemra ban on media outlets broadcasting live public speeches by former Prime Minister Imran Khan. During the proceedings, IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah stated that the electronic media watchdog “exceeded its authority” in imposing the ban and directed the body to appoint an officer who could justify the suspension in a court of law. When the ban was imposed by PEMRA, the IHC chief justice was informed that PTI Chairman Imran Khan was scheduled to hold a live telethon to generate funds for flood victims. It was also argued in court that PEMRA imposed the ban because TV channels did not follow the time delay policy.

Following arguments from PTI lawyers, Chief Justice Athar Minallah concluded that the responsibility for not adhering to the time delay policy rests with the channels and that action should be taken against them rather than impose a ban on a person who has not been convicted.

Previously, the Chairman of PEMRA, Saleem Baig, had taken suo moto notice of the former premier’s speeches and had prohibited their live broadcast on all news channels via a notification. According to the PEMRA notification, Chairman PTI had continuously accused state institutions in his speeches and statements by levelling baseless allegations and spreading hate speech through his provocative statements against both state institutions and officers, which is detrimental to the maintenance of law and order and is likely to disturb public peace and tranquility.

PEMRA’s notification and its suspension from the IHC raised many eyebrows within political and social circles. Everyone is wondering whether Chairman PEMRA has the authority to take suo moto notice and impose a ban on anyone.

The regulatory authority was established with the goal of facilitating and promoting free, fair, and independent electronic media in Pakistan, as well as ensuring diversity and plurality, empowering the audience, and maximising the reach of electronic media. Therefore, it is PEMRA’s responsibility to foster a conducive environment and provide equal opportunities for all news channels to thrive.

Thus, the question is whether PEMRA is acting fairly. Since its inception, it has been known to engage in arm-twisting of the politicans and the journalists and harassing the news outlets.

Previously, Pemra’s decision to prohibit coverage of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif also raises serious concerns. The ban on Nawaz Sharif imposed by PEMRA was imposed by an individual rather than a court ruling or a complaint from a specific institution. Due to his status as an absconder and proclaimed offender, the authority’s chairman immediately issued a notification prohibiting the broadcast of the former ousted premier’s speeches, interviews, and public addresses.

This is PEMRA’s standard operating procedure when it comes to quelling some important voices. It was used to snub ARY and Bol News during the PML-N administration and previously it turned against Geo and other news outlets critical of government policies during the PTI regime. In Islamabad, there is once again a PML-N government, and Chairman PEMRA is yet again being used as a puppet. It has already banned ARY News and is restricting space for other channels that criticise the ruling administration.

While speaking to Bol News about the issue of prohibiting live coverage of the PTI Chairman Imran Khan, former PEMRA member Mian Shams stated that the Chairman of PEMRA lacked the authority to take suo moto action. As per the authority’s rules, there is a procedure for taking action against anyone. He regretted that, under pressure from political governments, successive PEMRA chairmen had illegally imposed bans on politicians, journalists, and media outlets.

He went on to add that PEMRA is an independent and autonomous body with five independent members, one from each province and one from Islamabad. He also informed that Pemra currently had only two members: one from Islamabad and one from Balochistan. The seats from Punjab, Sindh, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) have been vacant for more than three years, and the chairman has deliberately left them vacant. The Balochistan member is also acting as the official spokesperson for the Balochistan government, which is a violation of PEMRA rules.

Shams believed that Chairman PEMRA was using these two members to make such contentious decisions. He further believed that the chairman did not have the authority to prohibit live coverage of Imran Khan until and unless directed by a court of law or complained about by a specific institution.

Even after a complaint of this nature, the matter will be brought before the members for discussion and final decision. He claimed that the chairman could not make such decisions on his own. He also strongly condemned the decision to prohibit former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif from giving public speeches, calling it a violation of PEMRA law. He further maintained that governments intentionally appoint weak and pliant chairmen, ignoring merit and required qualifications in order to use them to do their bidding.