When on Thursday, Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar resumed the suo motu case of the alleged extra-judicial killing of Naqeebullah Mehsud, he asked sternly Sindh Inspector General (IG) of Police AD Khowaja: “Where is Anwar Rao?” The suspended from service senior superintendent of police, Malik Rao Anwar, is accused of executing the extra-judicial killing of Naqeebullah Mehsud. The IG, who has been protected by the court for over a year from being transferred from the office despite Sindh and federal governments’ several attempts, was kind to him. A three-member bench of the Supreme Court, presided by the chief justice, is conducting the hearing on the case. After being presented with an investigation report by Khowaja, the chief justice remarked: "The state has been blamed for his murder. Those who were responsible for providing security are being accused of murder."
The court had given a deadline to the IG for the arrest of the former SSP. The deadline ended in 36 hours. As the deadline expired, the bench asked the court about the whereabouts of the former SSP. The IG had the usual response to offer: milord, the force has been trying to locate him and as soon as he is arrested, he will be presented to the court of law. The court’s deadline and the IG’s response beg questions. Why on the earth, the court has picked this Naqeebullah Mehsud case, that Intezar Ahmed murder case, here the Kasur’s minor girl’s rape-cum-murder case, and there a minor girl of Mardan’s similar case. Did hours-long coverage of these cases on the TV screens influence the judges’ mind and hearts to such an extent that they took these cases on priority? Did twitter trends on these issues qualify them to attract the judges’ attention? What if a murder is not on twitter trend and is also not TV screens, will it be buried in police files forever?
This court’s pick and choose approach has made the media houses powerful players. They know they are on the courts’ watch list, so their content has a great value in the justice delivery system. This fact makes the anchor brigade, paid civil society activists and editors powerful people. They create and control the contents and play with it, according to the framings and the agenda-setting regime, they are into.
The deadline and pick and choose regime was initiated by Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry when he became the chief justice in 2004. His suo motu working was religiously followed by then Lahore High Court Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif. Once Justice Sharif took suo motu notice of a news story published in an English newspaper that an old woman had protested outside the Lahore Press Club, alleging that a certain police officer had registered 100 cases against her only son. While going to the office in his chauffeur-driven car, the good judge marked the story and as soon he reached the office, he asked his staff to call the police officials. They were assigned to find the woman, and cases detail. The whole police machinery swung into action. First, they searched for the reporter, who had filed the story. Once the woman was found, they struggle to find the case record. At the end of the day, not even a single case was found. But the whole exercise consumed police resources and energies. The case was disposed of without any remorse and another suo motu was handed down to police.
This honorable court, however, has taken up several public interest issues, which were not even media radar. The issue of contaminated water supply in cities is one of them. The supreme milord also visited Lahore hospitals to check water supplies there. His visits will bear fruit.
It is necessary that the whole justice system is reformed where very commoner gets justice without much hassle.
And yes, milord, every story, the media file may not be true.
No comments:
Post a Comment