According to this index, Finland tops the list of the countries with a free media, followed by two other Scandinavian countries – Norway and Denmark.

Eritrea is at the bottom along with Turkmenistan and North Korea.

China, Cuba, Zimbabwe and Afghanistan are also at the bottom.

The United States dropped from 20 in 2010 to 49 in 2015, four steps above Haiti, Burkina Faso, Namibia and El Salvador. Suriname, Samoa and the eastern Caribbean rank higher than the United States.

Frequent police and public attacks on journalists, coercion to reveal sources and the government’s failure to pass a law protecting journalists caused this fall.

Pakistan is ranked 159 on the list of 180 countries.

The report points out that last month, a Pakistani parliamentary committee approved a draconian law for controlling the Internet.

Reporters Without Borders notes that the latest draft of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act “undermines civil liberties in Pakistan and flouts freedom of the media and information”.

It also notes that the bill contains provisions that would allow the government to censor any content without referring to judge, to use overly broad criteria to criminalise many online activities, and to gain access to Internet user data without any judicial control.

The report also noted that there has been a resurgence of violent attacks on media groups that criticise the military, including the ISI. During 2014, non-state actors also continued to target journalists, the report adds.

The report points out that Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf also attacked journalists who criticised its activities.

Two journalists were gunned down in October, bringing the number murdered since August to four.

In July, unidentified gunmen torched a cable TV operator in Karachi.

Also in July, unidentified people bombed the home of the Peshawar bureau chief of a Pakistani television channel.

In May and June, a journalist was attacked in Multan and trucks carrying newspapers were torched.

In June, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority temporarily closed the transmission of a television channel in various areas.

Dawn

KARACHI: The latest order from the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) warning private television channels to not broadcast what it called hate speech has once again caught the electronic media off-guard. Media managers and practitioners once again find themselves at a crossroads between military, political parties and the government.

The warning was issued late Thursday night after a speech of Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) leader Altaf Hussain in which he had made certain remarks against the armed forces. He later sought an apology for the tirade, but private news channels which ran his speech had already been served show-cause notices.

Pemra’s directive, which is being widely viewed as a follow-up to the military spokesman’s reaction, is nonetheless interesting because when the MQM chief was live on more than 20 news channels, the regulatory body was nowhere in sight and had approached none of the channels.

It was only when Director-General Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Maj-Gen Asim Bajwa tweeted the army’s response to Altaf Hussain’s speech, threatening legal action against the MQM chief that Pemra sprang into action.

Interestingly, a few hours prior to the broadcast of Altaf Hussain’s speech, then Senior Superintendent of Police Malir Rao Anwar held a press conference that ran live and equated the MQM with the banned Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan.

However, Pemra chose to say nothing at the time and although the Sindh government recalled Anwar from his posting not long after, television channels went on with their coverage that concentrated on what quickly became the talk of the evening.

Given the content of Anwar’s press conference, one expected a strong reaction from the MQM chief which is exactly what happened. Altaf Hussain spoke in a critical fashion and the military spokesman reacted. Having assessed DG ISPR’s reaction, the information ministry and the defence minister appeared to have quickly jumped on the bandwagon of how the MQM chief’s words constituted “hate speech” that should be prosecuted, bringing us once again to the question as to whether the latest Pemra order on the same in fact constitutes media censorship.

Most media practitioners and observers believe that both Pemra and the media are responsible for the content that ends up getting aired live. Azhar Abbas, President and CEO of the upcoming television channel BOL, says it is the responsibility of news management teams to monitor live content.

More on this: Altaf’s remarks on army to be legally pursued: ISPR

“All TV channels have submitted written assurances to Pemra that they will use a delay mechanism to ensure that hate speech is not aired,” he says.

What constitutes hate speech?

Moreover, delving into the crux of the matter, senior journalist and television anchor Talat Hussain believes there is a need to define what exactly constitutes hate speech so media managers and practitioners have a clear understanding of their freedoms and limitations along with the rationale for these.

He insists that the concept is used in an arbitrary fashion at times, leading to its abuse at the hands of vested interests and censorship in order to achieve political ends.

“For example, Altaf Hussain has said a number of things in the past and there hasn’t been a problem,” the anchor says, adding that “what was being said in the recent dharnas (sit-ins) outside the Parliament could also be regarded as hate speech”.

He further asked that although certain anchors had been resorting to hate speech in their talk shows, it was baffling that no action had been taken against them.

With the two senior journalists exploring the areas of responsibility and definitions when it comes to the concept of hate speech and how to manage it in a frenzied environment of breaking news TV, former Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Justice (retired) Tariq Mehmood dubbed the operations of the media as a circus where everyone airs their views with no accountability.

However, in the case Altaf Hussain’s controversial speech, he says it is the state’s responsibility to pursue the matter through a formal complaint against the MQM chief who is in fact a citizen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain.

Broadcasters, PFUJ yet to respond

So far there has been no reaction from either the Pakistan Broadcasters Association (PBA) or the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) against the Pemra order.

PFUJ President Afzal Butt says he has not read the order and would only relay a reaction on the subject after he has gone through it.

A ‘dilemma’ for journalists

Journalists have pointed out though that unless an enabling environment is created and the media is given adequate protection against censorship, such instances are likely to occur again and again.

This is particularly critical in the case of Pakistan which remains one of the most dangerous places in the world for journalists who often get caught in the crossfire between state and non-state actors.

A simple example to illustrate the dilemma confronting journalists and media organisations here is a suo motu notice taken in 2014 by then chief justice of Balochistan Qazi Faez Essa over the publishing and airing of statements by banned Baloch separatist organisations.

He had asked a media representative to explain why the media aired and published these, to which the response came that if the court could assure security and protection to the media from the said banned organisations, such statements would never be aired. And this was where the subject came to rest.

So the question presents itself, is Karachi any different?

Dawn

The post Is Pemra’s directive aimed at curbing hate speech? appeared first on Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF).

Though mass media was flourishing in Pakistan the country was still among most unsafe states for journalists to work in.

Denmark’s Ambassador to Pakistan Jesper Mollar Sorensen made these remarks while presiding over the inaugural session of the 2nd ‘Transforming Youth Media Summit’ on Saturday.

The envoy said that some 110 journalists had lost their lives in the line of duty in Pakistan in the last 10 years, meaning that almost one journalist was losing his life every month while 11 journalists were being killed every year.

He said the sorry state of affairs for media personnel was persisting despite the situation that mass media scene of the country had witnessed a phenomenal growth in over the last 10 years.

Sorensen said that during the decade the number of TV channels had grown to 100 from merely one, the number of FM radio stations had increased to 150 from a single one, while almost 2,000 newspapers were being printed in the country in 11 languages.

The diplomat added that given the risks and problems being faced by journalists in the country, the government of Denmark had recently launched a media support programme in Pakistan in collaboration with the non-government sector at a cost of $2.8 million while the total assistance of Denmark to the country stood at $50 million.

Sorensen said the Denmark’s media support programme would be utilised for strengthening the role of Pakistani media in support of a democratic and pluralistic society and a publicly accountable and representative system of governance in the country. “The two-year assistance programme would also be helpful for proposing and adopting a consensus code of ethics for the entire Pakistani media while it would be used for improving skills and safety of journalists working at district and local levels especially for regional languages’ media.”

The ambassador noted that in the past decade, the emergence of a vibrant media scene in Pakistan had played a crucial role in evolving socioeconomic and political discourse for the larger benefit of society and public. But, he maintained, media workers, especially those employed in the provinces, were often untrained and underpaid. “In addition to these challenges, threats and violent attacks against journalists continued in Pakistan.”

Sorensen noted that Pakistani youth and media combining together would become a highly influential force, which could be used for bringing improvement to society and public affairs to a great extent.

He said the Danish government would also provide support to improve working conditions, provision of due privileges, safety and security to the media personnel in Pakistan while the media of the country should also be equally supportive to strengthening the democratic order.

Also speaking on the occasion, former information minister Javed Jabbar said the media commission appointed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan some years back had given some 40 proposals for improving and upgrading the functioning of the mass media in the country.

He said one of the important proposals was that the ministries of information and information technology should be merged together, besides the proposed merging of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) with the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) for proper regulation of the mainstream, conventional, modern and technologically advanced mass media.

He told the audience that the information ministry had expressed its willingness to accept the majority of the proposals given by the media commission.

Jabbar said that no doubt the media scene of Pakistan had flourished but the progress was not much public-friendly as at present there was no genuine public interest broadcaster in the country, which could be completely free of government’s interference. “While also at the same time such ideal media outlet should not be fully dependent upon advertisements for its financing needs.”

The former minister said that there was need to change the revenue model of Pakistani private TV channels as they were fully dependent upon revenue generation through advertisements while fee paid by the subscribers was pocketed by cable operators and no share of it was given to private TV channels.

Noted TV artist Durdana Butt viewed that there could be no democracy in the country without responsibility, and urged the private TV channels to show more responsibility in their conduct and content while covering public interest matters.

The News

The post Challenges to media despite its phenomenal growth highlighted appeared first on Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF).

“ No compromise will be made on the freedom of expression and no such incident will be tolerated in future”,said Kamil Ali Agha.

Zafar Ali Shah said that it was good that the government has already withdrawn the FIR against a news channel,but at the same time he asked the media to keep the national interest supreme while covering various incidents.

Farhatullah Babar said that the statement of the provincial information secretary and the Balochistan CM are contradictory.

Earlier Information Secretary Balochistan said that the FIR against the TV channel was not registered on the directives of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.However he said that law and order situation there was not normal and courts have time and again asked the administration to take action against those newspapers and news channels that glorify the terrorist activities. In this regard he mentioned a Balochistan High Court order.

Chairman Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) Chaudhry Rasheed said that the authority has not taken any discriminatory action against on particular TV channel but issued notices to all violating rules.

Agenda item about foreign content on local channels was deferred with a directive to PEMRA to present a comprehensive report of rules violations and the action taken against the violators within ten days.

About the PTV presentation on the appointments in the corporation the Chairman of the committee Kamil Ali Agha said that it was very unsatisfactory and asked Secretary information Dr Nazir Saeed that the ministry itself should provide a report on PTV.

Expressing its concern over the reports that the PTV has not taken part in the bidding to purchase rights of showing Pakistan cricket matches,the committee decided to summon the past two managing directors of the PTV and ask them how during their tenure the PTV used to telecast the matches live.
The meeting was attended by Senators Fahatullah Babar, Shirala Malik, Daud Achakzai, Saeeda Iqbal, Farha Aqil and Zafar Ali Shah.

Senior officials of the Information Ministry,PEMRA and PTV were also present in the meeting.

Associated Press of Pakistan

ISLAMABAD: It’s not only the top constitutional office holders who are flouting the judgements of the superior judiciary, a junior Pemra official, who was given a look after charge of Pemra chairman by PPP government and was removed by Supreme Court two-weeks ago, has started using powers of the Pemra Chairman in blatant violation of December 20, 2012 judgement and has summoned the Authority meeting on January 11.

Office of the Chairman Pemra fell vacant more than two years ago but the PPP government did not appoint a Chairman as it is a four-year tenure post and had PPP appointed a new chairman in time, his tenure would have come to an end soon after PPP’s term in government.

Thus the strategy was to appoint a chairman in the last year of the PPP tenure so that the chairman could continue after the PPP government completes its term and could serve the objectives of the top leadership.

During hearing of a case, the apex court had barred Dr Jabbar from functioning on a temporary look after charge. Dr Jabbar was serving as executive member Pemra and even his appointment as executive was entirely illegal and was made in sheer violation of rules and regulations. However, Dr Jabbar performed exceptionally to fulfil the wishes and desires of the rulers of the day to pressure the media freedom and used mafias to control electronic media channels by allowing them to spread as much obscenity and vulgarity as they could.

Then the Supreme Court removed Dr Jabbar from the office of the Chairman and ordered federal government to appoint new and regular Chairman Pemra. Dr Jabbar started working as executive member but top Pemra officials say that Dr Jabbar considers completion of some “pending tasks” as crucially important and thus is taking approval of the same from a authority meeting was a must.

The Supreme Court is all set to take up this case today (Wednesday) but government has not appointed new chairman Pemra for obvious reasons to make as much delay as possible.

Top Pemra officials say that under section-8 of the Pemra Ordinance and rules 3(4) of the Pemra rules 2009, only Pemra chairman can summon the meeting of the authority and even all the members of the authority cannot hold a meeting without consent of the chairman. However, for completion of some “crucially important tasks” the summoning of meeting was indispensable.

A Pemra letter provided to this correspondent bearing No. Pemra-1(2)/Secy/2013/81 (Islamabad), Dated: January 08, 2013 with subject: 81st Meeting of Authority, reads as; “The 81st meeting of the authority has been scheduled on 11th January 2013 (Friday) 1500 hrs at Pemra headquarters, Islamabad. You are requested to remain present in the office along with relevant officers/officials till the meeting is concluded.”

The letter has been dispatched to all DGs of Pemra, all GMs of Pemra headquarters, General manager Admin for necessary arrangement of the meeting and security consultant to ensure security arrangements. A copy for information is also sent to PS to Executive member.

Justice Jawad S Khawaja while issuing order to stop Dr Jabbar from functioning as Chairman Pemra on look after charge had held that he had been taking important decisions while he had no legal authority to do so and the authority is being run without a chairman since long.

Rule 3 of the Pemra Rules 2009 deals with the meeting of the authority and its sub-clause-4 held that only chairman Pemra can summon a meeting of the authority and even all the members cannot hold a meeting without consent of the chairman. This clause says that members are interested to hold a meeting they will have to “request” the chairman to summon the meeting. This rule reads as; “3. Meetings of the Authority, etc.- (1) The Authority shall hold not less than four meetings in a calendar year and may meet as often as it deems fit in order to dispose of its functions as provided for in the Ordinance. (2) The agenda and notice of the time, date and place of the meeting shall be circulated among the members at least one-week prior to the date of the meeting:
Provided that for disposal of urgent matter requiring immediate decision, the agenda and notice may be circulated among all the members through phone, fax or email. (3) The Authority may seek opinion of any officer or expert on a specific item of the agenda. (4) The Chairman shall convene a meeting of the Authority either of his own accord or, as the case may be, on request of more than one half of the total membership.

Clause (1) of section 8 of Pemra Ordinance says that if in a meeting Chairman will preside over the meeting of authority and in his absence, members of the authority may elect any member to preside over the meeting. This section 8(1) reads as:

“8. Meetings of the Authority, etc: (1) The Chairman or, in his absence, the member elected by the members for the purpose, shall preside over a meeting of the Authority. However, no member in his individual capacity or all the members collectively could summon/call the meeting of the authority and summoning of the meeting of authority is exclusive power of the Chairman Pemra. Supreme Court could consider this flouting of its orders and many illegal appointments in Pemra including illegal appointment of Dr Jabbar as executive member of the authority during its today’s hearing.

Pakistan Press Foundation