Bars term PECA a bid to stifle dissent, freedom of expression
LAHORE
A petition moved before the Lahore High Court on Tuesday assailing the recently passed PECA Ordinance 2022, has claimed the ordinance is a ‘sheer violation’ of not only the top court verdicts but also a violative to provisions of the Constitution of Pakistan.
Petitioner Mohammad Ayub also alleged the law was amended to save the government from its ‘illegal acts’ and requested the court to declare the ordinance unlawful, as it is liable to be set aside in the supreme interest of justice.
The petitioner made principal staff officer of President Arif Alvi, principal secretary Prime Minister Imran Khan, secretary Ministry of Law and Parliamentary Affairs, secretary establishment, establishment division, secretary cabinet and secretary law and justice division as respondents.
Ayub also claimed the President has promulgated PECA amendment ordinance with ‘mala fide intention and for ulterior motive’ just to ‘harass and blackmail the opposition’ as well as the public at large, the impugned ordinance was promulgated which is against the scheme of law.
“The motive behind the promulgation of the impugned ordinance is a direct attack upon the independence of the judicial system as well as judges of constitutional jurisdiction.”
According to the impugned amendment in section 2 of the said Ordinance the word person of age less than 10 years or less than 14 years is replaced and according to impugned interpretation “person’ includes any company, association or body of persons whether incorporated or not, institution, organization, authority or any other body established by the government under any law or otherwise”.
The petitioner revealed case proceedings of a journalist Mohsin Baig saying the Islamabad High Court has discouraged abuse of power of public officers as well as FIA as the high court has discouraged promulgation of harsh laws just to escape the public pressure.
According to the impugned amendment, the definition of aggrieved person is changed to achieve ulterior motives, any person either informant or complainant can file a complaint under the impugned amendment, it is not out of context to narrate here that due to said amendment the proxy litigation will increase and ultimately that will result in overburden the courts as well as prosecution, the petitioner submitted.
While deploring a recent amendment to the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) 2016, three bar associations unanimously turned down the change to the law terming it an attempt to stifle dissent and freedom of expression.
In a statement on Tuesday, the Supreme Court Bar Association said, “Under the guise of PECA Ordinance, the ruling elite has once again launched a vicious agenda to cut-throat its political opponents and to silence all those who believe in freedom of speech, opinion and expression so as to hide its failure.”
The ordinance is a “classic example of the authoritarian mindset and a reflection of extremism”, said the SCBA, adding, “The country has not seen such oppressive restriction even in the worst dictatorships.”
It added the fake news remained a challenge but “any such remedy, which is contrary to the Constitution and against personal liberty, must not be allowed”.
The SCBA further stated the amendments to the Section 181 of the Election (Amendment) Bill 2017 are akin to pre-poll rigging and would adversely affect the electoral process. The SCBA said these ordinances were “strictly ultra vires to the Constitution” and the bar association will soon challenge the ordinances.
Meanwhile, the Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA) termed the amendments to PECA Act a “colourful exercise of power by the president and federal law minister”. It said the “delinquent law ministry is pandering to the self-serving egos of those that wish to rule in an autocratic manner – oppressing any reasonable criticism as ‘fake news’,” it added. The ordinance tramples the fundamental rights of free speech, it said further, adding that the legislation is reflective of “fascist and dictatorial regimes”.
Separately, the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) urged the high court to declare the law extra-constitutional as it endorsed a plea filed in the court against the new law.
The LHCBA said the ordinance violated the constitution and should be declared void. It said the legislation was an attempt to repress the independence of media and judiciary.
