‘Patriotic’ pundits flock to the talk show studios of the TV stations channelled around Aabpara to condemn the coverage that flashed on the screen the picture of the DG ISI, as has been accused by the victim journalist’s family.

Pointing fingers at the ISI chief has been treated as an attack on the ISI that, they say, resulted in the agency’s defamation at a global level. A number of anchorpersons playing up the issue are more interested in raising questions than getting answers.

In many cases, their ignorance was on blatant display. In the lines below, I will attempt to address these questions.Question 1: Why were the allegations hurled at the ISI chief with indecent haste as Geo TV could have waited for Hamid Mir to regain consciousness and make his statement?

Answer: Allegations levelled by Amir Mir were based on a recorded statement that Hamid Mir handed to his family and friends for its release in case of any attempt on his life. The allegations might have surprised many viewers but the fact remains that the victim had shared his concerns with many of his friends and colleagues. Needless to mention that neither the family traumatised by this tragic incident was ready to wait nor were his colleagues. They had planned to lodge a protest and approach other channels in case Geo TV refused to air the tape. It took a couple of hours to decide before airing the statement. Question 2: Did Hamid Mir inform his top management about these threats and the likely perpetrators?

Answer: Yes, he had conveyed in writing to the management that decided not to make it public unless the situation demanded so. His email on February 25, 2014 (2:15pm) to Geo TV management said all about that Amir Mir disclosed on Geo TV attributing it as statement of Hamid Mir. Other than learning through Hamid Mir, the management was aware of the precarious situation through the threatening messages received from other quarters about the victim journalist in the past.

Question 3: Will the emails be made public?

Answer: They will be presented as evidence to support the allegations before the judicial commission .

Question 4: Was Hamid Mir the only person from Geo TV facing threats?

Answer: Many others are also under threat. Included among them Question 5: Isn’t it unfair to accuse ISI chief without any solid evidence?

Answer: All Pakistanis respect the national security institutions and their sensitivity is kept in mind. That said the individuals working for the agencies were not immune from criminal investigation by any legal standard. Also the fact remains that investigation into a crime starts from the suspicion. The first question asked by the police to victim side is: who do you suspect? The purpose is to get to the culprits. .

Question 6: What if ISI chief’s involvement is not established?

Answer: That will be good news and remove dust of suspicions. It is rather a golden opportunity for ISI to come out clean by offering able assistance to the investigators in getting to the culprits given the capability and a lot of resources at its disposal. The ISI and MI had successfully done this job after the assassination attempt on former President Gen Pervez Musharraf. They apprehended the rogue elements within the forces that were hands in glove with the militant organisations in this killing plot.

Question 7: Was it fair to flash repeatedly the photo of ISI chief on Geo TV?

Answer: Let me ask a counter question. Don’t media flash pictures when some other noted figures are held accused in any case?

There is no news on TV carried either without graphics or pictures. The picture shown was not the only photo of ISI chief available. Several were about the ISI headquarters and others related to the agency. Since ISI chief was being accused, not the agency overall, hence only his picture was flashed.

Moreover it is recognized legal right of the family of any victim of an attack to name suspects.

Hamid Mir had also conveyed this to some of his friends and investigative agencies are senior journalists of the Group and complaint in this regard was lodged with the government and its institutions.

ISI chief has to face the judicial commission now

On different occasions when allegations were leveled against the then COAS Musharraf, the then ISI chief Shuja Pasha, Premier Nawaz Sharif, Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif, former President Asif Ali Zardari, PTI chief Imran Khan, former PM Yusuf Raza Gilani and former PM Raja Peraiz Ashraf, the pictures of all these leaders were shown along with the allegations repeatedly by electronic media. When Benazir Bhutto accused the then President Musharraf, the then IB chief Brigadier Ijaz and the then Punjab CM Pervaiz Ilahi of conspiring to murder her, the pictures of all them were repeatedly shown by the electronic media. When the PML-N had accused the then ISI chief Shuja Pasha of backing Imran Khan and demanded his resignation, the PML-N demand and accusation along with Pasha’s picture were repeatedly shown on the electronic media.

Moreover, when reports about any blast, price hike, power outages, accident, police action against protesters and any unjustice with masses are aired, related pictures are also repeatedly shown on TV screens.

This should not be considered as a conspiracy. If pattern and behaviour of electronic media is properly understood, question of any conspiracy won’t come into mind. Is it not a fact that if any journalist is killed, the scene of the incident is shown repeatedly. The electronic media did not spare Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhary before he retired as chief justice. The allegations on sitting judges were also aired by the media.

Thousands of channels in India, US and UK enjoy maximum freedom. If it is complained in Pakistan that agency chief’s coverage was wrong, then the coverage of the issues related to civilians is also wrong. The electronic media airs beepers and holds talk shows in accordance with the importance of the issue. The similar pattern was adopted on this issue.

Question 8: Why is there such hue and cry over coverage of this issue?

Because in our country there is a concept of sacred cow and untouchables about the very powerful. Allegations have been leveled in the past also but this time they came with a bang. Or perhaps because Jang Group is the biggest media group the issue had generate so much hue and cry.

Whatever is highlighted in this context is done in accordance with the constitution and law. Those who are leveling criticism they will soon know that the coverage of this incident was in accordance with constitution and law. The coverage was meant to uphold supremacy of constitution, freedom of press and rule of law. Media gurus know that this box (TV) in the world has its own dynamics and it continues to earn its independence.

It should be noted that Jang Group alone and also along with journalists had moved courts and Supreme Court with the pray to regulate media. Hamid Mir and Absar Alim, who remained with the Jang Group, had also moved court in this regard. But this is unfortunate that courts have not moved fast, nor the government had paid attention to it.

Jang Group had also been asking the government to regulate media. This is Jang Group’s official stand. The prime minister and information minister are witness to it.

Question 9: Did Geo TV take version of ISI?

Answer: As the allegations levelled by Amir Mir were aired, it followed a clarification from the ISPR. Where ISI chief’s picture was flashed together with the allegations raised against him, there was ISPR clarification run with the picture of DG ISPR Maj Gen Asim Saleem Bajwa.

Question 10: Did ISI or ISPR complain to Geo over running the picture?

Answer: Neither of them contacted the management hence no objection was raised. Carrying the news and dropping it later on was the sole decision of Geo TV without any external intervention. This issue was only raised through opinion-makers aligned with national security agencies.

Question 11: Why ISI chief was asked to resign?

Answer: This demand was not made by the organization. This was the stand of one of the senior most journalists of the Jang Group who is among the most credible newsmen of the country. The opposite view of his stand from within and outside the Group was also aired

The News

The complaint was submitted under the Pemra Ordinance and rules for a false and scandalous campaign undermining the integrity and tarnishing the image of state institution ISI and its officers, sources told The Express Tribune.

The four-page complaint, against Geo TV which includes the script of news bulletins, tickers and breaking news, says that ‘the said reporting has violated the specific terms and conditions of its licence’.

The violation of terms and conditions of the Geo TV licence issued by Pemra to the Independent Media Corporation (Pvt) Ltd makes the network liable for measures including ‘cancellation of licence by Pemra’.

The complaint urges Pemra to ‘immediately suspend the licence of Geo TV, and after examining the facts cancel the licence of the Independent Media Corporation (Pvt) Ltd granted under Section 20 of the Pemra Ordinance, 2002’.

It seeks ‘… prosecution of the editorial team and management of Geo TV under Sections 33 and 36 of the Pemra Ordinance 2002 read with all enabling provisions and the Pemra rules as amended from time to time’.

Referring to the April 19 incident, the complaint says that ‘apparently an assassination attempt was made by some unknown assailants at around 1730 hours at Karachi on Hamid Mir, an anchorperson associated with Geo News, the 24/7 News Channel of Geo TV a venture held and operated by M/S Independent Media Corporation (Pvt) Ltd, Karachi. Immediately thereafter, a vicious campaign libelous and wherein false accusations were made against a state institution tasked to work for the defence, sovereignty and integrity of Pakistan i.e. Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and its DG Lt General Muhammad Zaheerul Islam’.

“The telecast in question/campaign was aimed at undermining the integrity and tarnishing the image of the state institution and its officers and falsely linking it with the terrorist outfits/activities,” it said.

“The attempt was detrimental to the interest of the institution and the country. The said footage was picked up by foreign media, particularly Indian channels, who instead of objectively reporting the incident overplayed it repeatedly,” it added.

The complaint says, ‘The reporting made and the programs aired cannot be viewed as a single event. Geo TV has a history of acting illegally in furtherance of the anti-Pakistan agenda. If required, material can be provided to the regulator. The inability of the editorial team and management or monitoring staff at Geo TV failed to either control the content and deliberately allowed scandalous views to go on air. This constitutes a breach of terms of its licence and violating code of conduct. Moreover, the above instance establishes that the editorial team and management of Geo TV has clearly violated the following provisions of Pemra rules/code of conduct, making Geo liable for cancellation of its licence: (a) Rule 15 of Pemra rules (b) Para (c), (g), (j) of standing code of conduct (c) Section 20(a) of the Pemra Ordinance (d) Section 27(a) of the Pemra Ordinance.”

“The said false, malicious and irresponsible reporting is a continuation of the policy of Geo TV for maligning the state institutions as it has done earlier in the case of Daniel Pearl, Wali Khan Babar, the killing of Mr Hammad (an officer of Supreme Court of Pakistan) and also the killing of parents of an honorable judge of the Supreme Court at Lahore. The malicious campaign later proved false.”

The complaint further said that the print media, particularly Jang and The News also published defamatory, libelous and scandalous material as has been done by their sister-concerns in electronic media. The management, therefore, followed the suit and joined hands for carrying out the above mentioned illegal acts.

This makes the said publications and the persons responsible for actions under i) Sections 3, 4 and 9 of the Defamation Ordinance 2002, ii) Sections 19 and 27 of the Press, Newspaper, News Agencies and Books Registration Ordinance, 2002 and the rules framed there-under and also the terms and conditions of the licence/declarations granted or operated there under and iii) the measures and mechanism under the Press Council of Pakistan Ordinance, 2002.

A senior official told The Express Tribune that a sealed envelope carrying the defence ministry’s application from the secretary defence was delivered for the Pemra chairman at 9:32 pm. “Pemra will discuss the entire issue in its Board of Directors meeting on April 24,” sources added.

Express Tribune