• SC issued a written order on Khyber Pakhtunkhwa govt plea.
• SC’s apprehension “proved correct” after Khan mentioned other cases.
• Commenting on irrelevant matters may affect public perception: order.

ISLAMABAD: Justifying its rejection of the KP government’s plea for live streaming the NAB amendments case hearing, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has stated that broadcasting of the court proceedings of cases involving politicians can be used for political “point-scoring”.

The top court on Saturday issued a detailed verdict on Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government plea that had sought live streaming of the hearing of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) amendment case.

Referring to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan, the apex court stated that when the head of a political party wants to be heard, who is not an advocate of this court, there is a real probability that these hearings may be used for political purposes and point scoring and in respect of matters which do not concern these appeals. 

The application for the live streaming was rejected by the apex court in a 4-1 verdict on May 30 with Justice Athar Minallah disagreeing with the majority judgement.

The case was heard by a five-member SC larger bench headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Minallah and Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi.

“This was a paramount consideration when we had dismissed the application. And, our apprehension proved correct later in the day. When Mr. Niazi [PTI founder Imran Khan] addressed this Court on (30 May 2024) he also mentioned other cases, the general elections held on 8 February 2023, a commission of inquiry and his incarceration; all these matters have nothing to do with the subject matter of these appeals. This cannot be permitted as it would thwart the proper administration of justice,” read the order.

It further added that commenting on matters not under consideration may affect public perception, the rights of those who are not before us, including their fundamental right to fair trial and due process may also be affected.

The application, in addition to being not maintainable, has no merit, the order said adding that the KP advocate general also not stated “why the sudden interest, or desire, for live-streaming, when his Government did not join the hearings of CP No. 21/2022, let alone make a similar request when this Court was hearing the petition”. 

“In conclusion, we would like to add that while a request to live broadcast or live-stream may be submitted, and may also be objected to, it is clarified that this, as matters presently stand, is in the exclusive domain of this Court,” it added.