Law: PEMRA (Council of Complaints) Rules, 2010

Section: Rule 8(2) & Rule 10

Law: PEMRA Ordinance, 2002

Section:

JUDGMENT SHEET

  MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB, J:-Through the instant appeal, the appellant, Channel 24, impugns respondent No.1’s decision dated 10.10.2016 (based on recommendations dated 20.09.2016 made by the Council of Complaints), whereby a fine of Rs.5,00,000/- was imposed on the appellant. 

2.     Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the complainant/respondent No.2 (Miss Maryam Nawaz Shareef) had filed a complaint before respondent No.1 (Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority) against the appellant; that in the said complaint, it was alleged that in the program called “Khara Such”, aired by the appellant on 10.06.2016, it was falsely reported that respondent No.2 had held meetings with Federal Secretaries, and had given them instructions with respect to the running of the affairs of the government, etc.; that the impugned decision dated 10.10.2016 is devoid of reasons; that in giving the said decision, respondent No.1 has blindly followed the recommendations of the Council of Complaints; that the said impugned decision is in violation of Rule 10 of the P.E.M.R.A. (Council of Complaints) Rules, 2010, which requires respondent No.1 to record reasons in writing for approving the recommendations of the Council of Complaints; that the Council of Complaints contravened Rule 8(2) of the said rules by not recording the statements of the appellant’s representatives; that at no material stage has respondent No.2 denied holding meetings with the Federal Secretaries; that the information revealed by the appellant in the said program was not false; that even if the picture shown in the said program was not of the meeting between respondent No.2 and the Federal Secretaries, respondent No.1 could not impose a fine of Rs.5,00,000/- on the appellant.