The Superior Court of Islamabad (IHC) on Tuesday requested the assistance of the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan in a petition presented by the organizations of journalists who challenge recent changes to the country’s cyber -iferous laws.
New provisions promulgated last month through the Law on the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (amendment) (PEC), 2025 introduces harder penalties so the government considers “false news”, the expansion of the state supervision of digital platforms and The creation of new regulatory organisms monitor social networks.
Journalists have assaulted legislation as an “attack on freedom of expression”, while the PTI opposition has also vociferantly protested the hurried passage of legislation in Parliament. Amnesty International has also raised concerns, the Pakistan Human Rights Commission, digital rights activists and the European Union.
Judge Inaam Ameen Minhas made a petition today presented last week by a faction of the Federal Journalists Union (PFUJ) of Pakistan.
The lawyer Imran Shafique appeared on behalf of the journalists’ Union, while the president of the IHC (IHCBA) Bar Association, Riasat Ali Azad, was also present.
In his request, the PFUJ argued that the Peque amendments violated fundamental constitutional rights, particularly freedom of expression, freedom of the press and due process.
The petitioner argued that several provisions of the amended law were too broad, vague and prone to arbitrary application, representing a threat to civil liberties.
The key objections included the ambiguous definition of “social networks”, which could be applied to several online services, and provisions that regulate “illegal and offensive” content, which are considered subjective and open to misuse.
The renowned television presenters also approached the IHC on Friday against the changes to the laws of Peca, trying to declare himself null and without void.
His request also echoed the concerns raised by the PFUJ in his plea, including the violation of fundamental rights. He argued that the amendments granted excessive powers to the authorities, which potentially led to censorship and suppression of journalistic independence.
The audience
At the beginning of the hearing, lawyer Shafique argued that the provisions in the amendment were formulated with such a hurry that even the number of clauses was declared incorrectly.
“There are so many errors in the law that two definitions of ‘petitioner’ have been given,” he said, adding that both were contradictory.
The lawyer also said that the Council of Social Network Complaints created under the Peque amendment was identical to an existing under the Pemra 2002 ordinance.
Here, the president of IHCBA, Azad, argued that the law was made in violation of articles 19 (freedom of expression, etc.) and 19a (right to information).
Judge Minhas then questioned lawyers about false news. “Do you think that the publication of false news should stop or not?”
“The problem of false news exists,” he said.
Azad stressed that, according to the Peque amendments, an appeal against a decision made by the Social Network Protection Court could only be presented “directly in the Supreme Court” instead of a superior court that heard it.
By stating that there were no consultations with interested parties, he said that the new provisions were mandatory to journalists to reveal their sources.
“A journalist obtains reports from his sources. If they cannot obtain the information, they will be informed only the weather, ”joked Azad.
During the hearing, the petitioner’s lawyer repeatedly requested the judge to issue a suspension order on the implementation of recent changes in the PCA Law. However, Judge Minhas suggested that the petitioner submit a separate diverse application for it.
“If there is any problem, let us know. We are present here, ”said the judge.
Judge Minhas then issued AGP Awan, looking for his help in the case. Subsequently, the audience was postponed indefinitely.
