Islamabad High Court Reviews PICA Act Amid Concerns Over Freedom of Press and Fake News

Islamabad:During the hearing of a case challenging the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PICA) in the Islamabad High Court, Justice Ameen Minhas raised concerns about the growing issue of fake news. He questioned whether the publication of fake news should be restricted.

The hearing was conducted in response to petitions filed by the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) and news anchors against PICA. Key figures, including representatives from journalist organizations and lawyer Imran Shafiq, appeared before the court.

Imran Shafiq, during his arguments, highlighted flaws in the PICA law, stating that it was rushed into creation, with even sections being inaccurately numbered. He pointed out multiple errors in the law, including contradictory definitions within the text. Shafiq also noted that the Complaints Authority created under PICA was essentially the same as the one already established under the PEMRA law.

President of the Islamabad High Court Bar, Riasat Ali Azad, argued that the law violated Articles 19 and 19-A of the Constitution, which ensure freedom of speech and the press.

In response, Justice Minhas asked, “Do you believe the publication of fake news should be stopped?” He acknowledged the issue of fake news but sought clarification on the matter. Azad responded by explaining that journalists often face pressure to report on corruption without disclosing their sources. He warned that if PICA were implemented, journalists might be restricted to only reporting on weather updates.

PFUJ President, Afzal Butt, reiterated that their objection was not to combating fake news but to the overreach of the law. He emphasized that while they did not oppose rules and regulations, they believed that such regulations should not violate constitutional and human rights.

The petitioners requested the court to suspend the PICA Act, urging a halt to its implementation. The court, however, advised that if any issues arose, the petitioners could file a separate application.

The court has deferred further proceedings, with the next hearing date to be announced by the Registrar’s office.