The Supreme Court has accepted the unconditional apologies of independent Senator Faisal Vawda and Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) MNA Mustafa Kamal in a contempt of court case.
During the hearing held on Friday, the Supreme Court accepted Faisal Vawda's unconditional apology and also withdrew the contempt notice issued against the two political leaders. The court directed the TV channels related to the case to submit their reply within two weeks and adjourned further hearing to a date that will be fixed later.
A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Aqeel Abbasi and Justice Naeem Akhtar, heard the case.
The hearing
During the hearing, CJP Isa inquired if what was said in the press conference was tantamount to scandalizing a judge. "Does it not constitute hatred and contempt against the judge and the court?" he asked.
The CJP directed lawyer Faisal Siddiqui to respond as an officer of the court. The counsel said Faisal Vawda's speech was contempt of court in retrospect, while Mustafa Kamal's speech was not.
The chief justice remarked that as a TV channel his clients disseminated the two press conferences, but now he was accusing them of contempt, while also saying they did nothing. Press conference are not shown live in foreign countries, where they are heard and then later edited and broadcast, he remarked.
The CJP remarked that the lawyer had himself accepted the contempt, so his clients, the TV channels, should be issued notices then. "Contempt of court action should be taken on your confession," he added. To this, Faisal Siddiqui said he had full faith in the chief judge and his decisions.
Siddiqui said if the court wanted answers with the signature of the TV channels, they would be provided.
The CJP remarked: "If you play games with us, we will not give you an opportunity, we will also deal with you strictly. You, not your client, have submitted the reply over which we can take action against you."
The chief justice remarked that the lawyer had submitted the same reply on behalf of his 26 clients, to which Faisal Siddiqui said that the defence of all the channels was the same. The CJP remarked that the court issued simple notices on purpose, and expected a response from the TV channels.
Justice Isa remarked that the lawyer had himself said at least one press conference was contemptuous, to which Siddiqui replied that he said in retrospect. "You did not say any such thing, don't do this." To this, Faisal Siddiqui maintained he had said it was contempt in retrospect.
Faisal Vawda, Mustafa Kamal apologise
During the hearing, the court called Faisal Vawda and Mustafa Kamal to the rostrum and while accepting their apology, the chief justice remarked that this nation needs both parliament and judiciary. "We respect you as an institution. I hope you will respect us a little, too. We will not take the matter further now that you have tendered apologies."
Vawda said they respected the institution of judiciary. "I am going through a crisis that a judge called me a proxy," he said, to which the chief justice said if he had not said those things, the matter would not have some to this point.
Later, the apex court issued the day's order, saying that the ongoing show-cause notices issued against Faisal Vawda and Mustafa Kamal have been withdrawn, and it is expected both will stand by their replies submitted in court. "If something like this happens again, only an apology will not suffice," the order added.
According to the judgement, notices were also issued to the TV channels showing the press conferences. Faisal Siddiqui appeared on behalf of 26 TV channels and an initial response was submitted on their behalf, but no one from the channels had signed the response. The response was signed by Faisal Siddiqui, which could not be considered a reply from the channels.
Contempt of court to TV channels
Faisal Siddiqui said that it was the constitutional duty of the channels to show the press conferences live. If this document is accepted as a reply, the channels have tried to justify the contemptuous broadcast. In retrospect, the TV channels' response is not reasonable. Contempt of court notices have been issued to TV channels, the order stated.
In response to the show-cause notices, details of the earnings from the press conferences should also be submitted, the order said.
