Is PEMRA Going Against The Constitution Of Pakistan? | PKKH.tv
PKKH Editorial
On 10thof Oct. 2012, PEMRA has released a gazette notification which is to be called the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Content) Regulations 2012. Ansar Abbassi in an article in The News, on 24th Nov. has rightly expressed his reproach regarding the regulation:
Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra)s Content Regulations 2012, notified by the government last month, do not contain any mention of Islam, the Islamic values, the Ideology of Pakistan and even the integrity of the institution of defense and armed forces.
It is interesting to note here, as to what are the preludes of writing a notification to be released by an authority, on behalf of a government it is working for as an organ. It is a complication that a state being an aggregate of the spirited beings constituting it, cannot act in a purely mechanical way; it has to be dealt scientifically but only to fulfill the will of the spirit. Therefore a document acting as a tool of the government must necessarily be in agreement with the spirit of the government i.e. its stated constitution; even more so the only purpose, of any such authority, should be to endorse the constitution in all new-formed circumstances.
To put things in simplicity, one can check that the preamble of the given document should be in full agreement with the preamble of the constitution of Pakistan; as this introductory part of the document is its identifier, just like the title describes a book. Observe the divergence of the two documents:
The preamble of the constitution of Pakistan starts with saying that:
The preamble of the PEMRA document starts by saying:
This comparison clearly shows that this new document is based on public feedback which is an extremely variable term; not on the sacred trust vouchsafed to us by the Almighty. Does PEMRA, being an instrument of the state of Pakistan, by any clause of the constitution, have any legal provision that gives it a power to suspend the preamble of the constitution in the preamble of its notification? The articles 29 and 31 of the constitution clearly define the Principle of Policy regarding all organs or authorities of the state, they say:
Therefore any authority including PEMRA, cannot establish any other clause of the constitution in conflict with the preamble (i.e. the spirit) and the Principles of Policy. If done so they will fall under article 6 of the constitution on high treason which says:
The PEMRA document does mention reference to two articles of the constitution, 19 and 37(g) that say:
One can gather from article19, that PEMRA may be taking the liberty that it will limit itself from actions that are subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law, but the dilemma is that in many cases the constitution is not sufficiently detailed; the law and the organs of the state have failed or deliberately neglected to endorse the spirit of Islam with the Shariah of Islam, wrongly fearing, perhaps in understanding with a section of the civil-society that Shariah will somehow restrict a fulfilling, happy life. On the same lines PEMRAs document has sufficed to keep the definitions of terms vague and left it upon instincts as to where the line between right and wrong will be drawn in each individual situation. While it goes into details such as ads of tobacco and prizes given to children in TV programs, it has left the much infuriated issue of obscenity and indecency, swiftly engulfing all sections of media, to open-ended definitions. Observe the definition of indecent given in the document:
In a diverse community such as mankind, and with no instrument to measure the thought processes, and with no machinery in possession of PEMRA that will detect how/when any of its subject a, b or c, has caught incentive, sensuality and excitement of impure thoughts and if so is he an ordinary man of normal temperament. Scientifically speaking, with a population of 18 crore unique individuals, a set of 18 crore standards of normality could be existing, therefore with such a definition, the assertion of any content being normal will always be an impossible to determine and an incomplete assertion, eventually being limited to the instinct of interpreters such as could be gathered under the heading public feedback. The crudeness of this mechanics is obvious, and the ultimate question becomes who will interpret the content to be indecent, obscene or demoralizing, and as it happens the document informs us that PERMA itself is that interpreter:
Perhaps now, Mr. Jabbar, acting-chairman of PEMRA, who has the final word in all decisions of PEMRA, is placed in the position that he will be, henceforth, considered the absolute standard of Normality, representative of the whole population of Pakistan.
As per the say of Ansar Abbasi the document does not mention Islam, meaning the document does not endorse Islam as its source and aspiration in constructing this document, or that this document will be facilitating the implementation of the spirit of Islam in the matter at hand. In fact the document goes one step further; it expresses its aspiration towards a secular policy; wherein the document did not mention safeguard of Islamic values, what was the need to safeguard Secular values, why were they also not left to generalization, observe the clause in PEMRA document:
Further scrutiny of the document is required, and it has become imperative upon all learned member of the society to engage in the interpretation of public documents and the working of the state in accordance with the constitution, and to step forward as elements that will demand and guarantee the revival and inculcation of the spirit of the nation within the dying body of the state. Not the physical dying that would lead to the escape of the spirit but moral dying that would kill the soul of a working body and render it zombified.
Source
PKKH Editorial
On 10thof Oct. 2012, PEMRA has released a gazette notification which is to be called the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Content) Regulations 2012. Ansar Abbassi in an article in The News, on 24th Nov. has rightly expressed his reproach regarding the regulation:
Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra)s Content Regulations 2012, notified by the government last month, do not contain any mention of Islam, the Islamic values, the Ideology of Pakistan and even the integrity of the institution of defense and armed forces.
It is interesting to note here, as to what are the preludes of writing a notification to be released by an authority, on behalf of a government it is working for as an organ. It is a complication that a state being an aggregate of the spirited beings constituting it, cannot act in a purely mechanical way; it has to be dealt scientifically but only to fulfill the will of the spirit. Therefore a document acting as a tool of the government must necessarily be in agreement with the spirit of the government i.e. its stated constitution; even more so the only purpose, of any such authority, should be to endorse the constitution in all new-formed circumstances.
To put things in simplicity, one can check that the preamble of the given document should be in full agreement with the preamble of the constitution of Pakistan; as this introductory part of the document is its identifier, just like the title describes a book. Observe the divergence of the two documents:
The preamble of the constitution of Pakistan starts with saying that:
The preamble of the PEMRA document starts by saying:
This comparison clearly shows that this new document is based on public feedback which is an extremely variable term; not on the sacred trust vouchsafed to us by the Almighty. Does PEMRA, being an instrument of the state of Pakistan, by any clause of the constitution, have any legal provision that gives it a power to suspend the preamble of the constitution in the preamble of its notification? The articles 29 and 31 of the constitution clearly define the Principle of Policy regarding all organs or authorities of the state, they say:
Therefore any authority including PEMRA, cannot establish any other clause of the constitution in conflict with the preamble (i.e. the spirit) and the Principles of Policy. If done so they will fall under article 6 of the constitution on high treason which says:
Perhaps it is apprehensible now that stern caution has to be exercised in the construction of a document that will speak for the state; the document cannot have a body, when the spirit has been killed. To base the document on strong belief on freedom of expression is also in direct conflict with the spirit of Islam in the present global context, much more than it would have been at the time the constitution was being articulated. Freedom of Speech has become a label of the Liberal/Secular thinking that takes this tenet across boundaries that are forbidden for Muslims to cross. It is a freedom that is practically being used to uproot the Islamic morals from within the society, therefore in order to practice it is compulsory to define the exact extents to which it will be exercised, and that is exactly what this document fails to do. Not only that it does not use any direct phrase such as freedom of expression in accordance with Islam, it fails to use the word Islam in the entire document.
The PEMRA document does mention reference to two articles of the constitution, 19 and 37(g) that say:
One can gather from article19, that PEMRA may be taking the liberty that it will limit itself from actions that are subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law, but the dilemma is that in many cases the constitution is not sufficiently detailed; the law and the organs of the state have failed or deliberately neglected to endorse the spirit of Islam with the Shariah of Islam, wrongly fearing, perhaps in understanding with a section of the civil-society that Shariah will somehow restrict a fulfilling, happy life. On the same lines PEMRAs document has sufficed to keep the definitions of terms vague and left it upon instincts as to where the line between right and wrong will be drawn in each individual situation. While it goes into details such as ads of tobacco and prizes given to children in TV programs, it has left the much infuriated issue of obscenity and indecency, swiftly engulfing all sections of media, to open-ended definitions. Observe the definition of indecent given in the document:
In a diverse community such as mankind, and with no instrument to measure the thought processes, and with no machinery in possession of PEMRA that will detect how/when any of its subject a, b or c, has caught incentive, sensuality and excitement of impure thoughts and if so is he an ordinary man of normal temperament. Scientifically speaking, with a population of 18 crore unique individuals, a set of 18 crore standards of normality could be existing, therefore with such a definition, the assertion of any content being normal will always be an impossible to determine and an incomplete assertion, eventually being limited to the instinct of interpreters such as could be gathered under the heading public feedback. The crudeness of this mechanics is obvious, and the ultimate question becomes who will interpret the content to be indecent, obscene or demoralizing, and as it happens the document informs us that PERMA itself is that interpreter:
Perhaps now, Mr. Jabbar, acting-chairman of PEMRA, who has the final word in all decisions of PEMRA, is placed in the position that he will be, henceforth, considered the absolute standard of Normality, representative of the whole population of Pakistan.
As per the say of Ansar Abbasi the document does not mention Islam, meaning the document does not endorse Islam as its source and aspiration in constructing this document, or that this document will be facilitating the implementation of the spirit of Islam in the matter at hand. In fact the document goes one step further; it expresses its aspiration towards a secular policy; wherein the document did not mention safeguard of Islamic values, what was the need to safeguard Secular values, why were they also not left to generalization, observe the clause in PEMRA document:
Further scrutiny of the document is required, and it has become imperative upon all learned member of the society to engage in the interpretation of public documents and the working of the state in accordance with the constitution, and to step forward as elements that will demand and guarantee the revival and inculcation of the spirit of the nation within the dying body of the state. Not the physical dying that would lead to the escape of the spirit but moral dying that would kill the soul of a working body and render it zombified.
Source
