Islamabad (Web Desk): The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday rejected Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P) Deputy Convener Mustafa Kamal's plea seeking immediate acceptance of his apology case while giving independent Senator Faisal Vawda a week to submit his response to suo motu in contempt of court case.
A three-member SC bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Irfan Saadat Khan is heard the case.
On May 17, the top court had Isa issued contempt charges against the two lawmakers for their outburst against the judiciary by holding separate press conferences at the National Press Club in Islamabad.
The notices were issued apparently for several malicious allegations against the judiciary as well as the judges.
On May 16, the SC took suo motu notice of the explosive press conference by the former federal minister in which he criticized the judiciary and asked Islamabad High Court (IHC) judge Babar Sattar to present evidence supporting his allegations about spy agencies meddling in the judiciary.
During the hearing today, Barrister Farogh Naseem, representing Kamal, requested the court to accept his client's one-page unconditional apology.
He maintained that Kamal had actually referred to pending Riba (usury) cases. CJP Qazi Faez Isa questioned whether those cases were filed before the Federal Shariat Court.
Regarding the decision to take suo motu action over the speeches, the CJP expressed dismay at being subjected to abusive language, questioning if such language was acceptable in any country.
He clarified that the notice wasn't about criticism directed at him personally but rather about criticism against the judiciary. In response to Moiz Ahmed, Vawda's lawyer, expressing his client's desire to discuss Pemra, the CJP affirmed their right to speak as counsel.
Addressing Ahmed's intention to read out the questions and answers from Vawda's press conference, Justice Saadat scrutinized the context, noting Vawda's explicit targeting of Justice Babar Sattar and Justice Athar Minallah.
The CJP criticized media channels for broadcasting obscene language and questioned Pemra's ban on reporting court proceedings.
He stressed the importance of journalistic integrity and criticized those who spread falsehoods for monetary gain.
The court then issued notices to all the TV channels for broadcasting derogatory speeches directing them to submit their responses within two weeks.
Furthermore, the top court also sought Pemra's response regarding the ban on reporting court proceedings.
Later, the court adjourned the hearing till June 28.
