Find a Lawyer

INDEPENDENT MEDIA CORPORATION (PVT) LTD. versus PAKISTAN ELECTRONIC MEDIA REGULATORY AUTHORITY

ections Sections 26, 30A and 20 (c) ??? License Terms and Conditions Comp Complaints Council - Determine whether content transmitted by licensors includes "obscenity", "indecency", or "obscenity" Is. The forum for such a commitment under Section 30A of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002 - Applicant's acknowledgment of the scope, was also that of the Complaint Council under Section 26 of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance. No judicial determination can be made by the source. 2002, about whether the material transmitted by the appellant contained "obscenity", "obscenity", or "obscenity" - justification - is the argument that the High Court should determine whether the appellant transmitted. Whether or not material was "obscene", "indecent", or "obscene" was not legitimate because the High Court did not do the same under Section 30A of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance 2002. Appropriate response to "obscenity", "obscenity", or "prostitution" which in the present case was the Complaints Council under section 26 of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, in 2002 circumstances the appeal was dismissed [p. 213] A

P L D 2017 Sindh 209 

Before Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan J

INDEPENDENT MEDIA CORPORATION (PVT) LTD. through Authorized Attorney—Appellant

versus

PAKISTAN ELECTRONIC MEDIA REGULATORY AUTHORITY through Chairman—Respondent

M.A. No.45 of 2012, decided on 1st December, 2016.

Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance (XIII of 2002)-

—Ss. 26, 30A & 20(c)—Terms and conditions of licence—Council of Complaints—Determination as to whether content aired by a licensee contained "obscenity ”, "indecency ”, or "vulgarity”—Forum for such determination—Appeal under S.30A of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002—Scope—Contention of appellant, inter alia, was that no judicial determination could be made by the Council of Complaints under S.26 of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002 as to whether content aired by appellant contained "obscenity”, "indecency”, or "vulgarity”— Validity—Contention that the High Court should determine whether contents aired by appellant, contained "obscenity”, "indecency”, or "vulgarity” was not valid as the same was not the job of the High Court under S.30A of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002—Questions as to whether content contained "obscenity”, "indecency”, or "vulgarity” were best suited to be answered by the appropriate forum which in the present case was the Council of Complaints under S.26 of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002—Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. [p. 213] A

Bahzad Haider and Umar Pirzada along with Abid Naseem for Appellant.

Kashif Hanif for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 10th November, 2016.

immigration advocates from Bolan lawyer