The Justice of the Superior Court of Lahore (LHC), Aalia Neelum, said Thursday that he was giving the “last chance” to the Federal Government to explain the entire situation regarding the blockade of the social media platform X in the country.
Access to X has been interrupted since February 17, 2024, when the former Rawalpindi commissioner Liaquat Chattha accused the main electoral commissioner and a judge of the Superior Supreme Court to participate in the manipulation of the general elections of February 8.
The organizations of the rights agencies and the organizations of journalists have condemned the content of social networks, while Internet service providers have also lamented losses due to interruptions. The United States had also asked Pakistan to raise restrictions on social media platforms.
Today’s hearing was occupied by a bank of three members headed by the president of the Supreme Court Alia Neelum, who heard the requests of the journalist Shakir Mahmood and others. The Federal Government, the Ministry of Law, the Ministry of Information and others had been made in requests.
“How was the closing of X? The federal government is given the last chance [to explain]. The government must respond in court.
“After this, the head of the Cabinet will be summoned,” Judge Neelum ordered at the hearing.
At the last hearing, the LHC had sought a detailed report by the Ministry of Interior and the Telecommunications Authority of Pakistan (PTA) about the requests that challenge the prohibition with a directive to explain which government institutions were still using the prohibited application.
The president of the PTA, Major General (retired) Hafeezul Rehman, appeared before the bank today and presented a written response to the court.
The Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Asad Bajwa informed the Court that the Ministry of Interior did not have a mechanism to know who was using what platform or application of social networks through virtual private networks (VPN), to which Judge Neelum observed that the Ministry had the mechanism of blocking X but not discovering who was using it.
He said that the PTA had formed a committee to investigate the use of VPN to which the superior judge of LHC said it was only to distract the court.
Bajwa said a letter was also written to the authorities of the Social Network Platform, in which Judge Neelum asked if X had an agreement with the government.
“The government has no agreement with X,” Bajwa replied, to which the judge asked why X the authorities would respond to the government when they had no agreement with him.
“This bank is not sitting only to send an answer and grant an ocular route,” Judge Neelum said while Judge Ali Zia questioned whether the PTA’s X account was operational.
When informed by the president of the PTA he was, the judge pointed out: “What is this? Is it prohibiting it and then uses it yourself?”
Given this, the president of the PTA said that all X users in the country were using VPN, to which Judge Neelum asked him if he was using a VPN to which Rehman replied that he personally was not but the authority itself was.
“This is illegal,” Judge Neelum said before the admission of the president of the PTA to which he apologized and said he only informed him that the body was not using VPN.
“You don’t know what you came here and you gave such a big statement,” LHC judge told him.
Meanwhile, Judge Farooq Haider interrogated the president of the PTA if the VPN could be blocked to what Rehman said not immediately and would take some time.
Judge Neelum told the president of the PTA that it had been a year and that he had done nothing and that he was still going on about one more month.
Judge Haider questioned how VPN operated when X was reduced to what Rehman said they were used in software, banking and independent industries.
Judge Zia commented that the court had a simple question about PTA itself blocking access to X while using it simultaneously.
Meanwhile, Dag Bajwa said the use of VPN was legal to some extent.
Subsequently, Judge Neelum requested data on how much VPN were being used to access X to which Rehman said he could not give the exact figures at this time, which led to comment: “You are occupying such a large position but has no data.”
Judge Zia said Rehman had said that the PTA would immediately restore X if the Court ordered that the president of the authority again expressed his willingness to comply.
“This means that the PTA has done something wrong and now you are looking for help,” the judge observed.
“According to the rules, the content can be blocked to some extent, but the platform cannot be closed. It can stop the inappropriate use of X but cannot block X,” added the judge.
Meanwhile, Judge Neelum said: “Why didn’t the government fulfill its responsibility? [anything]. We do not have time to lose, why not take the court action for wasting the bank’s time? “
The bank postponed more procedures until April 8.
