Justice Ijazul Ahsan ruled this while issuing a detailed judgment on a petition moved by Mubashar Lucman seeking initiation of high treason proceedings against the owners of the Jang and Geo group and cancellation of the declaration of Daily Jang and The News and the licence of Geo TV.

The federation of Pakistan is the main respondent in the petition. The judge was of the view that nothing has been placed on record nor has anything been alleged that may show any direct or indirect nexus or connection between respondent Nos. 2 & 3 and any act on their part which may have effect of abrogating or subverting or suspending or holding in abeyance the Constitution of Pakistan or any part thereof. Also, how could Mubashir Lucman who is associated with a rival media group, can claim that he filed a petition again Jang and Geo in public interest?

Further it has neither been alleged nor argued that the said respondents have attempted or conspired to abrogate or subvert or suspend or hold in abeyance the constitution or any part thereof by use of force or show of force or by any other unconstitutional means.

In addition, there is nothing on record to show that the said respondents have aided or abetted or collaborated in one or more of the afore-noted acts.The judge said the offence of high treason is a serious offence considering that on conviction, a person is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There needs to be substantial material and evidence available on the record that may furnish prima-facie basis for the federal government to come to the conclusion that a person is liable to be tried under the said offence. The petitioner has not placed any such material showing commission or attempted commission of the offence on record except a book authored by him. “This, in my [judge] humble opinion, does not constitute adequate or sufficient material that may furnish any basis to grant the relief sought.

Text of judgment:

1. The petitioner is a known anchor person of a news group in Pakistan, He has filed this constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 and has appeared in person to argue the matter. He has pointed out that in a recent incident at Karachi, a prominent anchor person working with a news group owned by respondent Nos. 2 & 3 survived a murder attempt. He maintains that despite the fact that a First Information Report (“FIR”) has not so far been lodged, a scandalous campaign has been launched by the news group owned by respondent Nos. 2 & 3 on the basis of false, frivolous and unsubstantiated allegations against the Inter Services Intelligence Agency (“ISI”). He submits that this vilification campaign is violative of Section 20 of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance 2002 (“PEMRA Ordinance”) and the rules framed there-under. It is also gross abuse of the right of freedom of speech enshrined in Article 19 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

2. The petitioner submits that ISI is a credible state institution. It has a pivotal role in countering threats against national security. The campaign initiated by the media group owned by respondent Nos. 2 & 3 could defile its reputation and undermine the confidence of the general public in the said institution. These actions, according to the petitioner, constitute high treason.

3. The Petitioner alleges that respondent Nos. 2 & 3 are directly responsible for the illegal actions on the part of their media group and are liable to be tried and punished for committing the offence of high treason.

4. He prays that the Federal Government may be directed to initiate a case for high treason against respondent Nos. 2 & 3 under Article 6 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 read with Treason (Punishment) Act 1973 and the relevant provisions of the Pakistan Penal Code. A further direction is sought to cancel the license of respondent No.4, which runs television channels under the name and style of “Geo News” and “Geo Tez”. A prayer for cancellation of declaration issued in favour of respondent No.2 to publish the daily newspapers “Jang” and “The News” has also been made.

5. I have heard the petitioner at length and considered the arguments advanced by him.

6. The main focus of the petitioner’s arguments is that respondent No.1 should be directed to initiate a case against respondent Nos. 2 & 3 for high treason in terms of Article 6 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. The questions requiring determination by this Court are: – a. Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court can, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, direct the Federal Government to initiate a case under Article 6 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 against respondent Nos. 2 and 3. b. Whether this petition is maintainable in its present form and the relief sought can be granted.

7. On hearing the petitioner and examining the relevant provisions of law, the answer to the afore-noted questions has to be in the negative for the following reasons: – a. The offence of high treason is a special offence. It is a constitutional offence defined by our Constitution. Article 6 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 defines High Treason as follows: –

6. High treason.- [(1) Any person who abrogates or subverts or suspends or holds in abeyance, or attempts or conspires to abrogate or subvert or suspend or hold in abeyance, the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by any other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason.] (2) Any person aiding or abetting [or collaborating] the acts mentioned in clause (1) shall likewise be guilty of high treason.

[(2A) An act of high treason mentioned in clause (1) or clause (2) shall not be validated by any Court including the Supreme Court and a High Court.]

The contents of this petition and arguments of the petitioner do not show that respondent Nos. 2 & 3 fall within the definition of the “Person” visualized in Article 6. Nothing has been placed on record nor has anything been alleged that may show any direct or indirect nexus or connection between respondent Nos. 2 & 3 and any act on their part which may have effect of abrogating or subverting or suspending or holding in abeyance the Constitution of Pakistan or any part thereof. Further it has neither been alleged nor argued that the said respondents have attempted or conspired to abrogate or subvert or suspend or hold in abeyance the constitution or any part thereof by use of force or show of force or by any other unconstitutional means. In addition, there is nothing on record to show that the said respondents have aided or abetted or collaborated in one or more of the afore-noted acts.

b. The offence of high treason is a serious offence considering that on conviction, a person is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There needs to be substantial material and evidence available on the record that may furnish prima-facie basis for the Federal Government to come to the conclusion that a person is liable to be tried under the said offence. The petitioner has not placed any such material showing commission or attempted commission of the offence on record except a book authored by him. This, in my humble opinion, does not constitute adequate or sufficient material that may furnish any basis to grant the relief sought.

c. Article 6 (3) of the constitution provides that “Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) shall by law provide for the punishment of persons found guilty of high treason”. In exercise of powers under the said article, the High Treason (Punishment) Act 1973 was enacted on 29.09.1973. It provides that a person who is guilty (a) of having committed an act of abrogation or subversion of a Constitution enforced in Pakistan at any time since 23.03.1956; or (b) of high treason as defined in Article 6 of the constitution, shall be punishable with death or imprisonment for life.

However, in order to initiate proceedings for conviction of offence of high treason, Section 3 of the act provides as follows: –

3. Procedure. – No Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under this Act except upon a compliant in writing made by a person authorized by the Federal Government in this behalf.

I have specifically asked the petitioner if he has any authorization from the Federal Government to file a compliant relating to commission of the offence of High Treason by respondent Nos. 2 & 3. He has candidly conceded that such authorization has neither been sought by nor given to the petitioner. He has also not approached the Federal Government with the requisite evidence or material to initiate such complaint in accordance with law and the constitution.

d. During the course of arguments, the petitioner has vehemently argued that respondent Nos. 2 & 3 as well as the news channels which are owned and run by their company have unleashed a storm of false, frivolous and baseless allegations against ISI by alleging that the said agency is involved in the assassination attempt on Mr. Hamid Mir’s life. He submits that such reckless and baseless allegations could defile the reputation of the agency and undermine the confidence of the general public in the institution. In the first place, even if the argument of the petitioner was to be taken on its face value, the said alleged actions do not prima facie fall within the definition of high treason narrated above. Further it appears that ISI/Federal Government has already initiated proceedings in this regard by filing a complaint with the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) through the Ministry of Defence and has sought action against the respondent under the PEMRA Ordinance and rules and regulations framed there under. There is no denial of the fact that PEMRA being the sole regulatory and licensing authority in these matters has the requisite powers and the exclusive jurisdiction to address this issue in accordance with law. The aggrieved party has approached the competent forum which has taken cognizance of the matter. I have asked the petitioner how he is an aggrieved party in this matter. Further being associated with a rival media group, how he can claim to have brought this petition in public interest. He has not responded with a cogent and legally sustainable answer. In these circumstances, I find that the matter is already before the competent forum having been bought before it by an aggrieved party.

Prima facie, the petitioner is neither an aggrieved party in this matter nor is this Court the correct forum to agitate these issues. As such this petition is not maintainable.

e. The petitioner has also argued that the vilification campaign has commenced even before an FIR was lodged and that the matter is not being properly investigated. In this regard suffice it to say that the investigative machinery has already been set into motion. Further, the Federal Government has constituted a commission comprising 03 Hon’ble Judges of the Supreme Court of Pakistan to enquire into the matter. In these circumstances, the apprehensions of the petitioner are obviously misplaced and premature. Further if the victim of the offence or his family is dissatisfied with the manner in which investigation is being conducted, judicial remedies under the criminal statutes are available under the law, which can be availed by the concerned parties, should the need arise.

f. The petitioner has also argued that the license of Independent Media Corporation (Pvt.) Ltd. (respondent No.5) should be cancelled on the basis of the allegations made in this petition. As discussed above, if at all the petitioner has any grievance relating to violation of terms of license or the provisions of the PEMRA Ordinance, the correct forum for the petitioner is to approach PEMRA through an appropriate application for action in accordance with law. This Court in exercise of extra ordinary constitutional jurisdiction does not ordinarily interfere in matters in which adequate and efficacious alternate remedies are available. Reference in this regard may usefully be made to Rai Ashraf Vs. Muhammad Saleem Bhatti (PLD 2010 SC 691).

g. The petitioner has not been able to indicate any ground on the basis of which it can be inferred that the alternate remedies are either not efficacious or inadequate. Further the allegations made in the petition are generalized, vague and without any supporting evidence. The contents of the petition show that the allegations require a factual inquiry which would necessitate recording of evidence. It is settled law that this Court in exercise of extra ordinary Constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution does not ordinarily undertake the said exercise. As such even on this score, this petition is not maintainable. In coming to this conclusion, I am fortified by Fida Hussain and another Vs. Mst. Saiqa and others (2011 SCMR 1990), Shah Wali and others Vs. Ferouddin & others (2011 SCMR 1023), Amir Jamal and others Vs. Malik Zahoor ul Haq & others (2005 PLC 366) and Pervaiz Alam Vs. Pakistan Dairy Products (Pvt) Ltd. Karachi & 2 others (2000 SCMR 718).

h. As far as cancellation of declaration allegedly issued in favour of respondent No.2 to publish the Daily “Jang” and “The News” are concerned, there is a specific procedure prescribed in the News Agencies and Book Registration Ordinance 2002 (“Ordinance 2002”) for issuance of declaration and cancellation of the same. Admittedly the petitioner has not approached the competent authority/ forum provided by law for cancellation of the declaration in question. Where the law prescribes a thing to be done in a particular manner, it must be done in that manner alone and in no other manner. Reliance in this regard can usefully be placed on Khalil ur Rehman etc. Vs. Dr. Manzoor Ahmed etc. (PLD 2011 SC 512), Humayun Sarfraz Khan Vs. Noor Muhammad (2007 SCMR 307) and Ata Muhammad Qureshi Vs. The Settlement Commissioner Lahore Division Lahore (PLD 1971 SC 61).

In addition, not an iota of evidence has been placed on record to substantiate the allegation that respondent No. 2 has indulged in any act or omission that may furnish basis for cancellation of the declaration in question. Further the remedies available under Ordinance 2002 have admittedly not been availed. No reason is forthcoming for failure on the part of the petitioner to do so. Confronted with this situation, the petitioner has not pressed this prayer. His main emphasis has been to seek a direction to respondent No.1 to initiate a case for treason against respondent Nos. 2 & 3 under Article 6 of the Constitution read with the High Treason (Punishment) Act 1973. The reasons for refusal of this Court to grant the relief sought have been enumerated in detail in the foregoing paragraphs.

8. For reasons recorded above, I find that this petition is not maintainable. It is accordingly dismissed in limini.

The News

Justice Riaz Ahmad Khan of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) here on Thursday dismissed two petitions seeking the registration of an FIR and trial under Article 6 of Geo TV authorities.The IHC sustained office objections over the petition that had been raised earlier by the IHC’s registrar. The Registrar’s Office had raised objections that the high court is not a relevant forum and such petitions could not be filed directly with this court.

Two petitioner Qamar Abbas and Abdur Rehman on Tuesday filed these petitions while adopting that they filed applications before Kohsar Police Station for registration of FIR against Geo TV for allegedly maligning armed forces and ISI but the police did not entertain them.

The petitioners had been seeking from the court to order police to register FIR against Geo TV and also issue directives that a case be registered against the TV channel under Article 6 on treason charges.

Legal counsel for the petitioners argued before the court regarding office objections. The court however dismissed their applications sustaining the objections. In Faisalabad, Additional District and Sessions Judge (ADSJ) Manzar Ali Gill, meanwhile, dismissed an application for the registration of a case against the Geo News administration and Amir Mir.

A local lawyer had filed the application with the ADSJ for the registration of the case on April 29. The ADSJ, in his written order, said as the matter was being heard by a judicial commission, it could not be heart by this court.

Meanwhile, Mithi Senior Civil Judge Mian Fayyaz Rabbani rejected another application filed against the Geo and Jang Group. The court was moved by a local resident – Din Raj – who sought banning the Geo and Jang Group.

The judge, in his verdict, said the applicant did not have any proof; therefore, there was no room in the law to initiate a trial. In case, allegations were levelled against the ISI, it should seek a trial itself. The law did not allow a common citizen to become a petitioner when the allegations were levelled against a national institution. He also asked the applicant to file his complaint against the Geo and Jang Group with Pemra.

The News

Senior lawyer Akram Sheikh appeared on behalf of Geo News during the hearing at the authority’s headquarters while Dr Babar Awan represented the Ministry of Defence and ISI. Arguments have been completed from both sides and after the next session on May 9, the authority will take a decision.

Akram Sheikh contended that Geo News has not levelled any allegation against any state institution, including the army, and noted that in case of any illegal action against Geo News, the proper judicial forum would be approached.

He maintained that without its chairman, Pemra was incomplete and hence a hearing could not be held. In this connection, he referred to a judgement, wherein the Supreme Court (SC) judge Justice Jawad S Khawaja had made it clear that the authority would not be complete without its chairman.

He said no evidence is being offered to substantiate the allegations being levelled against Geo. As regards the track record and services of the Jang Group, the senior lawyer reminded the forum of the Jang Group’s valuable services spread over 75 years and said it has played a crucial part in the creation and strengthening of Pakistan.

He charged that the Ministry of Defence, ISI and Pemra, all state institutions, are harming the credibility of the group by levelling baseless allegations without providing any evidence that it was anti-Pakistan. He called for the withdrawal of these allegations against the group.

Akram Sheikh pointed out that their appearance in the hearing was a goodwill gestureand that not a single word was used against the military in its transmission, as the Jang Group considered military as the lifeline of Pakistan and accord utmost respect to it.

The senior lawyer contended the show-cause notice to Geo News was served in indecent haste, as a three-judge Judicial Commission has already been formed to probe the attack on Hamid Mir. He said raising this issue at Pemra separately amounts to meddling in the working of the commission. He added that the findings of the commission should be awaited.

At one point, Pemra Member Israr Abbasi said they want to decide the matter today (Tuesday). He said, “I know Mr Akram Sheikh the tactics you are trying to use.” At this, Sheikh replied, “You are using non-parliamentary language. You have repeated four times that you want to decide the matter today, which shows you are not impartial.”

In protest against Abbasi’s attitude, Sheikh walked out and returned after some time. He said that it should be put on the record that Abbasi’s attitude is inappropriate.He pointed out that the complaint by the Ministry of Defence was received on April 22 at night, whereas its official working hours end at 4pm. He added the next day, in less than 24 hours, a notice was served on Geo News that reflected Pemra’s mala fide intention.

The senior lawyer made it clear that the stance of Geo/Jang Group on accepting the notice and Pemra’s authority should not be construed as ultimate and final.

On his part, Dr Babar Awan criticised Geo News and alleged it had targeted both the army and ISI during its transmission and contended it was clear violation of the Pemra rules; therefore, immediate action should be taken against it and its transmission be closed down.

After the hearing, talking to a group of media persons, Dr Awan said that arguments from both sides had been completed and the matter would be referred to the complainant authority for consideration.He claimed to have understood the case well for he himself had been a victim of the media trial.

He was asked by Geo that since he himself had been biased towards the media, how could be fight the case on behalf of ISI on merit. He replied, “You have asked a good question. But it is not necessary to answer every question.”

Journalists, who gathered at Pemra Headquarters, to cover the proceedings, were not allowed to enter the premises and had to wait outside the main gate to get details of what happened inside during the course of hearing.

The News

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has condemned a request from the Pakistan Ministry of Defence for the government to shut down the country’s largest television news station, Geo.

According to media reports, on Tuesday, 22 April, in the first action of its kind, the Ministry of Defence requested that the government invoke media regulations to shut down Geo, accusing the station of running a “vicious campaign” against the military’s Inter-Services Intelligence directorate, or ISI.

Unease had been building between the Ministry and the station since last Saturday, 19 April, when Hamid Mir, a television anchor for Geo, was shot multiple times by unidentified gunmen as he was being driven to a television studio in Karachi.

Mir survived the attack and is being treated for gunshot wounds to the chest and shoulder. But as he was still receiving emergency treatment, Geo broadcast accusations from his brother, the journalist Amir Mir, who accused the ISI of being responsible for the attack. Geo also reportedly broadcast a photograph of the ISI chief, Lt. Gen. Zahir ul-Islam, while a senior journalist employed by the station called for the general to resign.

Media reports say that in a four-page letter to the state-run Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority, the Defense Ministry not only asked for Geo’s broadcasting license to be revoked, but called for the body to initiate criminal proceedings against Geo editors and management.

“This is a difficult period in Pakistan and passions and anger are clearly running high following the vicious attack on the journalist Hamid Mir. But this should not lead to controls and restrictions being placed on the country’s media,” said IFJ President Jim Boumelha.

“We strongly condemn the call for the closure of Geo and we call on the government of Pakistan to reject the request and to ensure the rights and freedoms of media organisations and journalists in the country are upheld.”

The National Union of Journalists in the UK and Ireland (NUJ) has expressed its opposition to the Defence Ministry’s actions and the NUJ London chapel of Geo TV have helped to organise a solidarity protest in support of Hamid Mir on Saturday 26 April at 3.30pm outside the Pakistan High Commission in London.

International federation of Journalists (IFJ)

“The signs on the horizon are clear. The fundamental problem appears to be that every one of the principal players involved in this crisis is responsible for a saddening deterioration of public affairs. The apparent undue haste with which the Independent Media Corporation and the Independent Newspaper Corporation, the twin media firms controlling the Geo-Jang group, pointed an accusatory finger at the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) as being complicit in what can only be described as a murderous attack upon television anchor and columnist Hamid Mir, is only one part of the problem. The promptness with which the ISI through its Deputy Director General responded with a complaint through the Defence Ministry to Pemra to seek revocation of the broadcasting licences and the declarations of the GEO-Jang group, has clearly demonstrated that the institution of the armed forces has acted in haste and has not critically examined the validity of their positions nor of subsequent actions that have stemmed from a misconceived interpretation of press laws.

“At first the government appeared to be dealing wisely with the new threat to press freedoms posed by the murderous attacks on Raza Rumi in Lahore and Hamid Mir in Karachi. The Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mian Nawaz Sharif, speedily acted to form a judicial commission to investigate the attempt on Mir’s life at the highest level. One would have thought with an appropriate high-level commission of enquiry, composed of the superior judiciary, any investigation of the incident of the attempt on Hamid Mir’s life appeared to be in capable hands. However, within a day of the Prime Minister’s announcement, the ISI through the Defence Ministry called for the revocation of the licences and declarations of the GEO-Jang group, with Pemra officials making suitably supportive statements. Thus despite a wise move by the Prime Minister to constitute a commission immediately, the guilt of the offending party had been prejudged, well in advance of the verdict.

“Clearly the need of the hour is to immediately force a cooling down of tempers in all sections of the state and security apparatus as well as, critically, within the media itself. If we are to speak of ensuring the ‘preservation of the sovereignty, security and integrity of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’ then the imperative is for all contending parties to exercise restraint.

“Additionally, the damage in this potentially explosive powder-keg needs to be contained. The judicial Commission of Enquiry should begin work immediately and avail of the services of Hamid Mir, among others, to reach a satisfactory conclusion as to which persons were responsible for engineering this attempt. Only when the findings are made public can it be determined whether the management and journalists of the newspaper (who have both been alleged as complicit in a slander campaign according to the ISI complaint to the Defence Ministry), were justified in levelling their early allegations. Nor would it be just to proceed with any retaliatory actions against this media group, awaiting the results of the high-level judicial enquiry that has been instituted. Such a travesty of justice is not becoming for any credible democracy.

“I appeal on behalf of the APNS, to Gen Raheel Sharif, the Chief of Army Staff, to rein in the knee-jerk retaliatory measures that have been initiated by various segments of the armed forces. This will lessen any public misperceptions with respect to what the security establishment sees as its principled stand in the matter. It is grossly unfair that Lt Gen Zaheerul Islam or any other member of the security establishment be presumed guilty unless the substance of such guilt can be irrefutably proved in a commission of enquiry. If he is found innocent, the media group found guilty of publishing and broadcasting such allegations against him must render an unqualified apology as per the valid international norms that govern such situations.

“In the meantime I also appeal to all sections of the media to exercise credible restraint and desist from publishing or broadcasting any statement which might be considered prima facie as defamatory or slanderous either against the ISI chief or against the media group. Concurrently it is imperative for the Prime Minister and the Federal Minister for Information to immediately commence a formal dialogue with all the major national bodies — the APNS, the CPNE, the PBA and the PFUJ — to attempt to provide a meaningful framework in which journalists can tell the truth and be protected from life-threats while doing so. This alone will ensure the ordered functioning of a nascent democracy and encourage the government to clamp down with unbridled severity on the spiralling incidents of violence against the media.”

Dawn

On April 22, 2014 the federal Ministry of Defence filed a reference with Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) for tarnishing the image of ISI. PEMRA, which has the authority to suspend or cancel the broadcast licenses, issued a show cause notice asking the Geo administration to submit its reply within 14 days. Pemra also directed chief executive of Geo News to appear in person on May 6.

Geo has challenged the notice by Pemra in the Sindh High Court, which has issued notices to the federal government and has fixed May 2 for hearing.

Tensions rose between ISI and Geo after the channel broadcast allegations by Mir’s brother that the journalist had told his family, employers, government and army officials that some officials of ISI including its Director General, Lt. Gen Zaheerul Islam had prepared a plan to eliminate him.

Geo reported that cable operators have blocked Geo’s transmissions in military cantonment areas and newspaper vendors in these areas have been directed not distribute newspaper of the group. Geo has also alleged that these ‘illegal’ actions have been taken on orders of ‘some forces’.

The Council of Pakistan Newspapers Editors (CPNE) in an emergency meeting unanimously declared that closure of any media house or cancellation of licence of any channel or publication will not be acceptable. CPNE said such action will lead to a grave crisis and will do irreparable harm to the democratic Pakistan. The meeting also declared that the right to freedom of speech is enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan and the state should provide adequate protection to journalists against threats from any quarter.

The meeting strongly condemned the attack on Mir and demanded that the government to take immediate and swift action to ensure the safety of all the media persons.

Pakistan Press Foundation

Yet, for all the missteps and violations of responsible conduct by the Jang group, the army itself seeking to shut down the country’s largest media house because of direct allegations against ISI chief Gen Zahirul Islam is a step too far — and ought to unite the media and the public against this step. For decades, anti-democratic and authoritarian elements have kept the public from choosing who it wants to lead the country and muzzled the media from holding the state to account for its deeds and misdeeds. Now, when a transition is under way and democratic continuity is on its way to becoming irreversible, there is more of a need than ever to have an independent and free media that can operate outside the still-present shadow of anti-democratic forces. The ISI and the army leadership may be rightly aggrieved, but seeking the cancellation of a media group’s TV licence is also a hostile move that can have a chilling effect on the media far beyond just the Jang group — even if Pemra in the end only slaps the group with a fine.

There is though another sad spectacle playing out in the midst of this clash between the state and media: the media at war with itself. Fuelled seemingly by ego, old and new rivalries and, surely, commercial interests, the electronic media has cannibalised itself in recent days. It has been unseemly and worse. With several media groups falling over themselves to denounce each other while simultaneously swearing fealty to the ISI and the army, the core journalistic mission of informing the public and holding the state to account has all but been forgotten. It is time for representative bodies of print and electronic media to come together to defuse tensions and lay down the rules of ethical journalism.

DAWN

Geo and Jang Group have repeatedly issued statements that they have the highest regard for all institutions. Despite the fact that Hamid Mir was hundred percent convinced that he will be attacked, the channel only aired the news after he was attacked informing the people what the assessment of Hamid Mir was without giving a final judgment as to who carried out the attack.

Was Hamid Mir the only one to point out some problems or some rogue elements within the ISI? No. There are many from within the armed forces, even former DG ISI Lt Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha and many retired officers including former COAS Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf, who clearly hinted at grave problems within the intelligence outfit. Many experts have termed such revelations as “ISI within ISI” and analysed that apparently these “rogue” elements are stronger and influential.

It is also an important point that politicians, bureaucrats, and everyone is attacked and criticised for anything but few people consider generals as “sacred cow”, over and above any criticism despite the fact that they are involved in violence against innocent citizens. Reports of judicial commissions establish the involvement of ISI elements in such violent activities. The biggest office of the state is the office of the president and even it is never spared from criticism.

It was Ahmad Shuja Pasha who at the time of his appearance before the Abbottabad Commission confessed that “ISI had brutalised many decent people”. However, Pasha had added, “ISI mindset, culture and methodology were changing.” Before this Abbottabad Commission, Pasha slammed former army chief Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf for bowing down to the Americans.

Pasha had disclosed that Musharraf had caved in to the US so promptly that the Shamsi airbase was given to them for drone strikes in Pakistan. Pasha was made to confess before the Abbottabad Commission that the Abbottabad incident was the result of lack of capacity, inadequate knowledge and wrong attitude. Pasha had even admitted of enforced disappearances, notwithstanding the fact the ISI had no detention powers.

While many in the media are trying to unnecessarily defend the ISI and are not ready to admit that correct criticism will help the institution improve, Pasha’s statement endorses report of the Umar Cheema Commission that the agency remained involved in terrible things like kidnappings and torturing citizens.

When Pasha said so, it was not treason but when Hamid Mir said the same on the basis of credible information, it is treason despite the fact that he is admitted in hospital after sustaining six bullets and is unable to walk.

Gen (retd) Musharraf in his 2011 interview with ABC in USA said, “It is possible that rogue members of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the military knew of Osama bin Laden’s hideout in Abbottabad.

“As a policy, the army and the ISI are fighting terrorism and extremism, al Qaeda and the Taliban. But rogue elements within are a possibility.“As I said, at the lower level, somebody (could be) following a policy of his own and violating the policy from above is a possibility.”

Top army officials have admitted that when Musharraf was attacked twice, some ISI officials were involved. But it was not treason as though it was hundred percent proved and these incidents killed many individuals.

These statements proved the existence of rogue elements within the ISI and pointing out this fact would have helped the ISI improve and cleanse its ranks of such elements.Former minister of state for religious affairs Dr Amir Liaquat Hussain stated on May 5, 2005 that then President Musharraf had faced threats from within. He had elaborated that some elements from within the institutions could attack to kill the former army chief. But it was not treason though the role of ISI “individuals” was clearly pointed out.

If there are rogue elements within the ISI or any other institution, they could be mentioned, criticised and blamed. There are no holy cows which could never be touched even if found involved in illegal activities or highhandedness against innocent civilian citizens. When any official of such a disciplined institute is involved in any such activity, the head of the organisation is always blamed as it is incomprehensible that he is not in the picture. A senior journalist, during a private meeting, tried to inquire from Pasha about the involvement of his agency’s officials in kidnapping and torturing Umar Cheema. Pasha was unable to deny but failed to deliver a direct response.

The Judicial Commission has concluded that the role of agencies in the Umar Cheema case was eminent.Keeping aside Pakistan, any wrongdoings of intelligence agencies are highlighted, questioned and criticised in civilised world by professional journalists. In the USA, the American media exposed CIA’s many wrongdoings, including the worst i.e. desecration of Holy Quran in Guantanamo Bay. Majority of the US people who have respect and dignity get united against the American government and elite intelligence agency CIA and get many wrongs reversed.

However, in Pakistan Hamid Mir’s own friends in the media are letting him down, so discussing his opponents is not important. Even in India, the independent Indian media used to expose scandals against its own army and a shameful scandal was reported about the Indian Army chief in recent years. All this brought improvements in those institutions of India. But all this is treason here in Pakistan and consequently the situation and professional excellence of security institutions is also not hidden from anyone.

Not only top army officials made such allegations against the ISI with all proofs and certainty but even top politicians did so but that was never treason. Pakistan’s present interior minister and the then leader of the opposition Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan made speeches taking the name of DG ISI and alleging him of involvement in illegal and unconstitutional activities. In his interview with Hamid Mir in Capital Talk, Nisar has even said that DG ISI Ahmad Shuja Pasha was making and strengthening a political party – PTI. He never gave any evidence but that was not treason. Today Nisar says he has never seen anyone making allegation this way in the entire world.

The News