Monday, January 20, 2014

Istanbul protest for murdered Turkish Armenian journalist

Last Updated: Monday, January 20, 2014, 00:32
Istanbul: Turkish riot police were out in force Sunday as large crowds massed in Istanbul to demand justice for a prominent Turkish Armenian journalist murdered seven years ago. 

"Murderer state will account for this," chanted several thousand protesters gathered in Istanbul's Taksim Square to mark the anniversary of Hrant Dink's killing, with questions still lingering about the circumstances of his death.

A demonstration has been staged every year since Dink's murder and has often turned into a general plea for justice. 

"I'm not here only for Hrant. For more than 100 years, there has been so much injustice in Turkey... And it is not only Armenians who have been affected," young historian Saro Dadyan told AFP.

Dink, 52, a leading member of Turkey's tiny Armenian community, was shot dead in broad daylight by a teenage ultranationalist outside the offices of his bilingual Agos newspaper on January 19, 2007. 

He had campaigned for reconciliation between Turks and Armenians, but incurred the wrath of Turkish nationalists for calling the mass killings of Armenians during World War I a genocide. 

Dink's supporters believe that those behind the murder were protected by the state and have asked for a deeper investigation to uncover officials who were allegedly involved. 

Backing up widespread accusations of a state conspiracy, a former police informant accused of instigating the murder claimed during his trial last month that he had warned police of the plot but they failed to act. 

Dink's self-confessed murderer, Ogun Samast, a 17-year-old jobless high-school dropout at the time, was sentenced to almost 23 years in jail in 2011. 

Today's rally came as the Turkish government is battling fresh protests in the wake of a wide-ranging corruption scandal ensnaring Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's closest allies. 

Turkish police yesterday fired tear gas and plastic bullets to break up a protest by around 2,000 people over controversial plans to impose curbs on the Internet.

"This demonstration would still be meaningful even if there was no talk of corruption. Because all these people are here for justice," said one man at the Dink demonstration who only gave his first name Levent. 

AFP

First Published: Monday, January 20, 2014, 00:32

Development: ‘Govt committed to ending extreme poverty’

Development: ‘Govt committed to ending extreme poverty’
Published: January 20, 2014
The country can progress if we focus on youth and educate them, says Abid Sher Ali. PHOTO: MYRA IQBAL / EXPRESS
FAISALABAD: 
“The government is committed to alleviating poverty in the country… priority is being given to neglected districts,” Minister of State for Water and Power Abid Sher Ali said on Saturday.
Addressing a cultural programme organised by the University of Agriculture, Faisalabad (UAF) at Iqbal Auditorium, he said imparting quality education was a prerequisite for development.
“The country can progress if we focus on youth and educate them,” he said. He said the government was utilising all available resources for this cause.
 photo AbidSherAli_zps1f2d36aa.jpg
“The laptop scheme, doubling of quota for students from Balochistan, and fees waivers are some of the steps the government has taken in this direction.”
District Coordination Officer (DCO) Noorul Amin Mengal stressed the need for providing equal opportunities to the youth.
“A culture of hardwork and brotherhood needs to be promoted to overcome the challenges the country faces,” he said.
Mengal said the district government had started several projects to highlight Lyallpur’s heritage.
UAF Vice Chancellor Iqrar Ahmad Khan said the UAF had students from across the country. He said, “The university is taking steps to strengthen the agricultural sector through imparting education, research work and outreach programmes.”
Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur, Nisar Ahmad and MPA Mian Tahir Jameel were also present on the occasion.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 20th, 2014.

Justice dept wants media to conceal names of people infected with HIV/AIDS under AIDS Prevention and Control Act


Justice dept wants media to conceal names of people infected with HIV/AIDS under AIDS Prevention and Control Act

THE Department of Justice (DOJ) has expressed support for several pending bills that would provide for a more comprehensive and integrated HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) and AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) prevention and control program, which includes declaring as unlawful the disclosure of confidential information by media practitioners that would lead to the identification of a person infected with the disease.
In a five-page legal opinion, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima said the justice department is fully backing the submission of several proposed measures before the House of Representatives that would further strengthen the Philippine government’s policy against the proliferation of the disease.
The DOJ is a member of the Philippine National AIDS Council (PNAC) which is the central advisory, planning and policy agency for the efficient prevention and control of HIV/AIDS.
The proposed laws before the House that pertain to HIV and AIDS prevention include House Bills  549, 1593, 2744, 3111 and 3242, titled “An Act Strengthening the Philippine Comprehensive Policy on HIV and AIDS Prevention, Treatment, Care and Support and Establishing the Philippine National HIV and AIDS Program, Revising for the Purpose Republic Act 8504, otherwise known as the Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998, and appropriating funds thereof”;
House Bill 1663, titled “An Act Strengthening Further the Philippine Comprehensive Policy on the Prevention and Control of AIDS, Amending for the Purpose Republic Act 8504,” and House Bill 3965, titled “An Act Providing for Counselling and Testing of Pregnant Women and Newbord Infants for Infection with Human Immunodeficiency Virus and for Other Purposes.”
“With regard to the provision declaring unlawful for any editor, publisher and reporter or columnist, announcer or producer in television, radio, and movie industry to disclose the name or picture, or any information that would reasonably identify any person living with HIV or AIDS or any confidential HIV and AIDS information without the prior written consent of the subject, it is suggested that this be clarified and limited to cases where the abovementioned persons would disclose confidential information that would identify any person as one living with HIV without the prior written consent of the subject,” de Lima said.
Currently, the confidentialy provision of Republic Act (RA) 8504, covers only health professionals and other medical practitioners.
Section 30, Article 6 (Confidentiality) of RA 8504 states that, “All health professionals, medical instructors, workers, employers, recruitment agencies, insurance companies, data encoders, and other custodians of any medical record, file, data, or test results are directed to strictly observe confidentiality in the handling of all medical information, particularly the identity and status of persons with HIV.”
Violation of the said provision, according to the law, is punishable by  six months to four years imprisonment and  the imposition of administrative sanctions, such as fines and suspension or revocation of the violator’s license to practice his/her profession and cancellation of the license to operate any business entity and the accreditation of hospitals, laboratories and clinics.
The DOJ expressed reservation as to the proposed provision on immunity for HIV educators, licensed social workers and other HIV and AIDS service providers, from suit, arrest or prosecution and from civil, criminal or administrative liability on the basis of their delivery of services in relation to the legitimate exercise of protective custody of children.
“To grant immunity to HIV educators, licensed workers and other service providers and to prevent the conduct of investigation and/or proceeding could work an injustice, especially in cases where there is actually no legitimate exercise of function or protective custody,” de Lima said.
With regard to the proposed provision requiring that all educational materials on HIV and AIDS prevention be made available at all international ports of entry and exit, the DOJ suggested that the said task be given to the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) in coordination with the Department of Tourism.
De Lima noted that the DOTC is mandated to establish and prescribe rules and regulations for the inspection and registration of air and land transportation facilities, and it is the said department to which the Philippine Ports Authority, Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority and the Manila International Airport Authority are attached.
Joel R. San Juan

Sunday, January 19, 2014

Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 - I: Cause of friction?






















































































December 06, 2011

Working Journalist (Conditions of Service) Ordinance 1960 wa
 promulgated by the Federal Government published in the Gazette of Pakistan on 24-05-1960. Based on this Ordinance, Working Journalist (Wage Board) Rules 1960 were framed which provided for establishment of a Board which can issue summons to any person as a witness in the course of any enquiry by the Board. 

In terms of these rules the Board can fix rates of wages separately for each discipline of Working Journalist referred to in Section 2 of the said Ordinance. The decision of the board fixing rates of wages are to be published in the Official Gazette. Subsequently on 11-08-1973 Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 was promulgated which repealed Working Journalist (Conditions of Service) Ordinance 1960. 

The salient features of this Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 are establishment of Wage Board by the federal government for fixing rates of wages in respect of newspaper employees in accordane with provisions of this act. The word Newspaper has been defined as any printed, periodical work containing public news or comment and the words Newspaper Employee include full-time Journalist and Non-Journalist and any person employed to do any work in, or in relation to any Newspaper whereas Newspaper Establishment has been defined as establishment under the control of any person for production, printing, publication of one or more Newspaper or for conducting any News Agency or Syndicate. 

Section 4 of the Act provides for mode of termination of employment of Newspaper Employees through good cause shown. Notice in writing and or payment of wage in lieu thereof is provided. Keeping in view the length of service of the newspaper employees one month notice is to be given in relation to Newspaper Employees having service between three months but less than two years, two months notice is to be given in case the length of service of Newspaper Employee is more than two years but less than three years service, and three months notice or salary in lieu of notice is payable if the length of service of Newspaper Employee is more than three years. Needless to mention, this provision is contrary to Standing Orders 12 of Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968 which provides for one month notice or one month's salary in lieu of notice irrespective of any length of service once workman is more than three months of service and is in employment of permanent nature. The definition of term 'Newspaper Employee' as given in Section 2 (d) covers Editor, Writer etc including Manager and is again in conflict with the definition of 'workman' as defined in Section 2 (xxxiii) of IRO 2011 at present in force through our the country. This Law is creating friction, heart burn and discontentment amongst commercial and industrial establishment workmen and even non-workman due to this discrimination as regards notice or pay in lieu thereof between Newspaper employee and others in the industrial and commercial establishment. 

Section 5 of the said Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 provides for the establishment of a Provident Fund Scheme under Provident Fund Act 1925 whereas in the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968 no such mandatory provision of law exists. Leaves with pay are covered under Section 7 of the said Act 1973 which are more in quantum as compared to the Leave with Pay provided for in the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968 applicable both to the industrial establishment under the Factories Act 1934 and or the commercial establishment. Section 8 provides for provision of grant of medical care in relation to the Newspaper Industry whereas the Provincial Employees Social Security Ordinance 1965 is applicable to industrial or commercial establishment provided the name of such an establishment is notified in the Provincial Gazette. Section 9 of the Act 1973 provides for establishment of Wage Board for fixing rates of the wages in respect of Newspaper Employees, whereas under IRO 1969, IRO 2002, IRA 2008, IRA 2010 and IRO 2011, the Labour Courts in the provinces and the NIRC at the Centre are to act as the Labour Court which alone are entitled to award fixation of wage based on industrial dispute so raised by the CBA or the employer in their respective establishments. Such Unions should necessarily be the CBA in the respective separate establishment. In terms of Section 10 of the Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973, fixation of wage by the Wage Board is to be based taking into consideration cost of living, prevalent rate of wages of comparable employment circumstances relating to the Newspaper Industry in different regions of the country and other circumstances which the Board may deem relevant. The Wage Board can fix rates of wages for time work and for piecework. The decision of the board is to be communicated to the Federal Government and is to be published in the Gazette. 

The most significant provision in the Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 is to the effect that the decision of the Wage Board in terms of Section 12 is to be deemed to be the Award of the Full Bench of the NIRC. Needless to mention that even under Section 38 D of Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969, a Wage Commission set up for Banks' employees gave award which was deemed to be an Award of Full Bench of the NIRC. This NIRC is pure and simple a Judicial Forum and the Full Bench of the said Commission consisting of Full Time Members of the Commission and or such other Members as are coopted as provided for under the SRO presently in force. Section 12 A provides that the Implementation Tribunal be constituted comprising of one or more member which shall ensure that the decision of the Wage Board is implemented. Punishments are provided in case of non-compliance of such Wage Board decision. The provision for appeal has been provided in terms of Section 13A whereby if that a sentence takes place, imposed by the Implementation Tribunal, appeal can be filed before Supreme Court of Pakistan. This Implementation Tribunal shall consist of Chairman and Benches of Tribunal containing of one or more member of the Tribunal. Section 15 of the Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 provides that the decision of the Wage Board is binding on all employers in relation to the Newspaper establishment. Every Newspaper employee is entitled to be paid wages at the rate not less than the rate fixed by the Wage Board. The said Wage Board has even been vested with the power to fix interim rates of wage on the pattern vested with the Labour Court to grant interim Award within the meaning and contemplation of law. Section 17 of the said Act 1973 provides that the provision of Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968 shall also apply to every Newspaper establishment. Section 19 of the Act provides that the provision of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other law or in the terms of any Award, Agreement, or Contract of Service made before or after coming into force of this Act. Proviso of Section 19 provides that even benefits under the West Pakistan Employees Social Security Ordinance 1965 shall be applicable to Newspaper Employees if they are more beneficial than those entitled to in this Act. It is also provided that Newspaper Employees shall be entitled to more favourable benefits in respect of matter notwithstanding what he is entitled to receive under this Act. 

Section 19 (2) of Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 provides that Newspaper Employees will be entitled to enter into agreement with the employer for granting him rights or privileges in respect of any matters more favourable than those which he is otherwise entitled under this Act. In other words, provision of Industrial Relations Law, various Laws like IRO 1969, IRO 2002, IRA 2008 and IRO 2011 onwards to date, are equally applicable and Newspaper Employees are eligible to become Member of Trade Unions, to be certified as Collective Bargaining Agent and the Union are legally entitled to raise industrial dispute over and above benefits notwithstanding those conferred to the Newspaper Employees under the Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 by way of the Wage Board Award. 

Section 23 of the said Act provides for framing of Rules by the Federal Government and those Rules provide for hours of work, holidays, earned leave, casual leave and sick leave, establishment of Provident Fund, constitution of Board of Trustees etc are all to be framed in relation to the Wage Board. Needless to mention under the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968 which is applicable on all industrial and commercial establishments, there is only statutory provision for Gratuity or which Gratuity is not payable in case of dismissal from service. As against this the Act 1973 provides that if there is Provident Fund Scheme, then Provident Fund amount including equal amount contributed by the employer will be payable to the employee even in case of employee having committed act of misconduct and for which he is dismissed from service. Invariably under Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968 the only retirement benefit is Gratuity which is not payable on dismissal but in terms of Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973, the Provident Fund has been made statutory compulsory which means and include that even in case of acts of misconduct for which the Newspaper Employee is liable to be dismissed not only his own contribution but equal contribution made by the employer is payable. This again is leading to friction, heart burn and feeling of deprivation amongst industrial and commercial employees/workmen. 

That analysis of the aforesaid salient features of the Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 have been made with a view to analysing that the provisions under this Act, exclusively in relation to Newspaper employees are more beneficial than in relation to benefits and terms and conditions of service as provided under Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968 which apply to the rest of industrial and commercial establishments in the country including the Newspaper establishment, and or any other Labour Legislation. In original IRO 1969, in relation to banks there used to be a Wage Commission, but subsequently this provision was deleted and presently in the field of Labour Legislation in the country barring the Newspaper Industry there is no other industry where the Wage Boards are constituted to frame wages and other terms and conditions and still employees have application of all other Labour Laws and right to form Union and raise industrial dispute separately. Nothing prevents them to claim more by way of application of provisions of the Industrial Relations Law presently in force. 

That based on the Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973, the Federal Government constituted 7th Wage Board, which had given its Award. The constitutional validity of the Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 was challenged in general and its Award dated 25-10-2001 as also the powers of Implementation Tribunal was unsuccessfully challenged by the All Pakistan Newspapers Society and others in C.P. No 987 to 989 of 2011 which has been dismissed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan on 19-10-2011. In other words, the Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 is intra vires the Constitution and the Wage Board Award has been correctly given and is to remain in the field until it is modified or varied by subsequent decision of the Wage Board. 

In India, the Working Journalist (Conditions of Service and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1955 was promulgated which was restricted and confined to the Working Journalist but through subsequent amendments, the said Law was even extended to non-journalists. Apparently in the case of the Independent Newspapers Corporation (Pvt) Limited vs Chairman Fourth Wage Board and the Implementation Tribunal for Newspapers Employees, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad (1993 SCMR 1533), Supreme Court of Pakistan have observed that the purpose of Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 has been introduced for the "betterment of financial conditions of persons employed in the Newspaper establishments." By this token of reasoning all employed persons in all other industrial commercial establishments should have Wage Boards separately for insurance companies, textiles, sugar, cement, pharmaceutical companies and banks in the private sector to name few of the industry. 

Article 3 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 provides that State shall ensure elimination of all forms of exploitation. Article 4 of the Constitution provides protection of law to individuals which are to be provided in accordance with the law. Article 10-A of the Constitution provides for right to fair trial for the purpose of determination of civil rights and obligation of the citizen of this country. Article 18 of the Constitution provides that every citizen shall have the right to enter upon any lawful profession or occupation and to conduct any lawful business. Article 25 of the Constitution provides that all citizens of Pakistan are equal before the law and are entitled to equal protection of law, the only exception being the special provision for protection for women and children. In the case of Pakistan Herald Publication (Pvt) Ltd Vs Federation of Pakistan (1998 CLC 65) the High Court appreciated the contention of Minto Senior Advocate of Supreme Court of Pakistan who had appeared on behalf of Working Journalists and pleaded for grant of better conditions of service to all employees of this industry as this extension to non journalists if not extended, would create friction amongst two sets of employees and will not be congenial to better relations inter ce. On this touchstone, it will have to be examined if this principle will have to be extended and applied to ensure congenial and or better relations and avoidance of friction amongst all employees in all other industrial and commercial establishments, and there should be separate law in relation to bank employees, insurance companies employees, textile, cement sugar, pharmaceutical, or fertiliser industry for presently no such condition as is applicable in relation to the Newspaper Industry exists anywhere in this country except in relation to the Newspapers Industry. Should avoidance and creation of friction amongst different sets of employees, which is not conducive to better industrial relations be restricted and confined to only Newspaper Industry, or the same be extended to all segments of workman in all industrial or commercial establishments through out the country. If this is not extended will provision of Article 25 of Constitution of Pakistan which provides Equality of Citizen and being equal before Law and are to be entitled to equal protection of law be infringed and will not identical protection like one conferred by Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 be not made applicable across the Board keeping in view Article 25 of the Constitution in relation to all employees covered under Industrial and Commercial Employment throughout this country be enforced. Will not the proverbial phrase of "sacred cow" not be attracted if only Newspaper industry is singled out to the exclusion of all industrial and commercial establishments and all other industry in this country with a Wage Award. No doubt, the Media and Press played a pivotal role in the restoration of a free and independent Judiciary in this country on and after 2007. However, between 1973 upto 2007 no such accolade can be given to the Press. If in 1973, the Act was framed it was not with a view to avoid friction or improve Labour-Management Relations or improve the financial conditions of newspaper employees but with a view of appeasing the Media or Press and keeping them on their side of the fence. 

The Supreme Court of Pakistan in Civil Petition No 987 to 989/2011 in a very learned well considered decision, authored by the Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry after hearing the learned Senior Advocates of Supreme Court of Pakistan has come to the conclusion after referring to the structure of the Wage Board and foreign decisions specially those of Australia that the Wage Boards are not Judicial Tribunals but Subsidiary Legislative Bodies deriving their authority from the State Legislatures. 

On this assumption it has been held that wage fixation by the Wage Board is a mere legislative function and not judicial or quasi-judicial act or an act of executive and administrative function. With all respect and humility it may be observed that neither in Australia, nor Newspaper Labour Law or Working Journalist (Conditions of Service and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1955 in India nowhere provides that the decision given by the Wage Board is to be treated as an Award of a judicial nature as given by the National Industrial Relations Commission which function in Pakistan in more than one Province and at the national level and is judicial in nature. No doubt reference to Section 12 of Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act 1973 was made by the Senior Advocates of the Supreme Court of Pakistan before the Apex Court to the effect that the decision of the Board shall be deemed to be an Award of the Full Bench of the NIRC. It need not be over-emphasised that Section 12 of the said Act 1973 specifically provided that all the provisions of the Ordinance namely IRO 1969 are applicable in relation to an Award of the Full Bench of the NIRC including Section 51 and 55 of the IRO 1969 and shall apply to the decision given by the Wage Board, constituted under the Act of 1973. 

Section 51 of IRO 1969 provides for recovery of money due from the employer under an Award given either by the Arbitrator, Labour Court or the Labour Appellate Tribunal. The very fact that this peculiar provision of Section 12 in the Act of 1973 which is more or less akin to Section 38 (D) of IRO 1969 which provides for establishment of Wage Commission for Bank employees makes the decision of the Wage Board a Judicial Institution like the NIRC which is not a Legislative Body but a Judicial Forum. If the Wage Board comprises of representative of employers and workers, it is not something of a special feature. 

It is recalled that at one time Three Members Industrial Courts were presided over under the Industrial Disputes Ordinance 1969 by District and Session Judges and or the sitting or retired Judge of the High Court and comprise one representative of the workmen and other of the employer whose role was advisory as in the case of the Wage Board, yet the Courts including the apex court in the case of Chittaranjan Cotton Mills Ltd Vs. Staff Union reported in 1971 PLC 499 have held those Industrial Courts as a Judicial Forum and not Legislative Forum, and held proceedings by an invalidly constituted Industrial Court as quorum non judice. Perhaps once the Award of the 7th Wage Board as held by the Apex Court to be legal and valid is fully implemented, the Supreme Court of Pakistan in all fairness would at some point of time revisit this matter and come to some conclusion as to whether a Wage Board is a Legislative Body or a Judicial Institution and secondly if there is no provision of at least one right of appeal against the decision of the Wage Board which is deemed to be an Award of the Full Bench of the NIRC, whether such a Law comes within the parameters of the decisions laid down by the Supreme Court of Pakistan earlier in the case reported in the PLD 2006 SC 602 at 679 (Muhammad Mubeen-us-Salam vs Federation of Pakistan), PLD 2005 SC 193 and PLD 1989 SC 6. At least one right of appeal has been recognised as a Fundamental Right by the Federal Shariat Court in PLJ 2005 SC 80 at 88. 

In fact, in the case of Mubeen-us-Salam, authored by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, noticed that under Section 2A of Services Tribunal Act 1973, the provision has deprived the right of appeal. The Apex court even held that it has been held by the Supreme Court that under Islamic System to dispense justice as a matter of right, one appeal should be made available. Reference to PLD 1989 SC 6, PLD 1996 Lahore 672 and PLD 2005 SC 193 was made and it was concluded that the "institution whose decision does not provide at least one appeal is unreasonable and can be struck down". In the case reported in PLD 1989 SC 6 at page 12 in the case titled Pakistan through the Secretary Ministry of Defence Versus the General Public, the Full Bench of Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court have held as under: 

"As far as the question that provisions barring the right of appeal in the Defence Service Laws are not repugnant to the injunctions of Islam is concerned, we cannot agree. This Court has held that the Islamic Injunctions of Adal, Qist and Ehsan warrant that an aggrieved party should be entitled to test the correctness of a decision which results in deprivation of his livelihood. 

See Federation of Pakistan and others v. Public at Large (PLD 1988 SC 202) wherein the validity of certain provisions of West Pakistan Press and Publication Ordinance (XXX of 1963) including the provisions therein which did not permit an aggrieved party the right of appeal was considered and it was held that the said provisions were against the injunction of Islam and must be amended and the right of appeal provided. The need for testing the correctness of a decision which results in deprivation of liberty and also livelihood would obviously be greater. 

The Court's decision in Federation of Pakistan and others vs. Public at Large (PLD 1988 202) has been reaffirmed in Federation of Pakistan v. General Public (Shariat Appeal No 17 of 1984 decided on 17-1-1988) and it was observed: And indeed the harshness in similar provisions of West Pakistan Press and Publication Ordinance (XXX of 1963) was removed by the Court in the same judgement. Remedial measures were ordered. 

The Federal Shariat Court in its impugned judgment has also held that the right of appeal was recognised by the Holy Prophet (Peace be Upon Him) as well as by the Khulafa-e-Rashideen and discussed this question in great detail. Nothing has been shown to us in refutation thereof. The plea, thus, that barring the right of appeal does not offend the injunctions of Islam, cannot be accepted." 

Credibility of Shaheen Sehbai, Mir Shakil ur Rahman and Jang Group of Newspapers.

Chagatai Khan


Monday, November 30, 2009

Credibility of Shaheen Sehbai, Mir Shakil ur Rahman and Jang Group of Newspapers.

Mr. Shaheen Sehbai, Group Editor, The News International - Jang Group of Newspapers is very fond of quoting Foreign Press particularly when Foreign Press [Pro Zionist] is negative on President of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari and PPP. Shaheen Sehbai while quoting The New York Times: “The problems in Afghanistan have only been compounded by the fragility of Mr. Obama’s partner in Pakistan, President Asif Ali Zardari, who is so weak that his government seems near collapse.” The Washington Post in a report by two correspondents said: “Zardari's political weakness is an additional hazard for a new bilateral relationship...The administration expects Zardari's position to continue to weaken, leaving him as a largely ceremonial president even if he manages to survive in office.” REFERENCE: Obama administration fears Zardari collapse WASHINGTON (Shaheen Sehbai)Updated at: 1525 PST, Monday, November 30, 2009 http://thenews.jang.com.pk/updates.asp?id=92494 Obama administration fears Zardari collapse Updated at: 1525 PST, Monday,November 30, 2009 http://www.geo.tv/11-30-2009/53849.htm


Should we believe Mr Shaheen Sehbai or his Editor in Chief Mir Shakil ur Rahman's Letter Addressed to Mr Shaheen Sehbai asking for his resign on filing Concocted Stories in The News International

"QUOTE"

SHAHEEN SEHBAI RESIGNS AS EDITOR OF `THE NEWS`

Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 07:42:48 -0500

Dear Colleagues and Friends:

It is with great sorrow that I have to convey this bad news to you all today. I have resigned today as the Editor.

I am enclosing enclosing the correspondence with MSR which is self explanatory. I wish to thank you all for all the cooperation and respect that you extended to me during these 14 months as Editor. I will be available to each one of you as a friend at all times. Wishing you the best of luck and a great future. Shaheen Sehbai

Pl read on:

Memorandum

To: Mir Shakil ur Rehman, Editor-in-Chief, The News
From: Shaheen Sehbai, Editor, The News
Date: March 1, 2002
Subject: Reply to Memo dated Feb 28, 2002


With reference to your Memo dated Feb 28, I have been accused of policy violations starting from March 2001 until the publication on Feb 17 this year of the Kamran Khan story on Daniel Pearl case. I can obviously understand that these so-called �policy violations?are nothing but an excuse to comply with the Government demand to sack me, and three other senior journalists, as you told me in our meeting in your office on Feb 22. I feel sorry that you have to make such excuses. You could have given one hint that you wanted me to go and I would have quit immediately.

I understand that you, as owner of the Jang Group of Newspapers have been so intensely pressurized in the last about two weeks that you are no longer ready, or able, to withstand it. All government advertising of the Group has been unjustifiably suspended by the Government starting Monday, February 18, 2002, following the investigative story done in The News by our reporter, Kamran Khan. This story, as it appears now, was just an excuse to twist the neck of the Group because the same story appeared simultaneously in the Washington Post and the International Herald Tribune and not one point contained in it was denied or clarified by the Government. Instead they tightened the screw on the Jang Group, as it appeared to be the most vulnerable and within their reach. This has a very obvious, and sinister message, for the free Press in Pakistan: Get in line, or be ready for the stick.?I feel sorry that you have decided to get in line, but I cannot be a party to this decision.

You had informed me officially at a meeting in your office on Feb 22, 2002, at 10.15 p.m. that you have been given names of four journalists of The News? myself, Kamran Khan, Amir Mateen and a staffer in our Islamabad Bureau (probably Rauf Klasra as you did not name the 4th person), to be immediately sacked before the government advertisements could be restored. You also informed me that officials of the Information Ministry wanted me to improve my PR with them as they had been complaining that I was not available to them, which is basically not true. You told me to directly contact these officials and talk to them about restoring the advertisements of the Group. Mr Mahmud Sham, who later joined our meeting, had informed us that the Secretary Information had clearly stated that matters were beyond his capacity to resolve and that we have now to meet the ISI high ups.

As a matter of principle I refused to call, or meet, any of these government officials in a situation when the entire Group was being held hostage with a gun pointed at its head. I, however, conveyed to the Government, through Mr Sham, all the evidence that the policy of The News?was very balanced, in fact tilted, in favour of General Pervez Musharraf's government, not under any government pressure, but because some of the things he was doing were right and The News never hesitated to support any right step taken by the Government. At least 50 editorials and over 100 Op-Ed articles published in about 6 weeks were cited to show that The News had no bias against the government. Proof was also provided of how �The News? at times, went out of its way to accommodate government requests.

Apparently these argument have not satisfied the government and the pressure is continuing on you, as your Memo indicates. Whatever other issues you have raised are childish and frivolous and I would not waste my time discussing them. But one message that emerges is very clear --- I ran the newspaper as a very independent Editor, according to whatever I thought was objective, true and professionally sound journalism. I made the best use of the latest available computer technology to create a working environment in which the entire editorial staff was integrated in such a network that almost everyone was available to each other at all times. I interacted with all my staff on a personal, round the clock basis, no matter where I was located or traveling, even outside Pakistan. So the charge that I was not available to my staff is laughable as it shows how far removed you are from the ground situation.

Your complaint of lack of general improvement in The News?is also obviously an excuse to build some case against me under Government pressure. You never once complained of that before. In fact the ground reality is just the opposite. I successfully built a great team of reporters, editors and writers during the 14 months I have been the Editor. We achieved a lot in breaking major stories, including assumption of the office of the President by General Musharraf and corruption in various government departments including Social Action Programme (SAP) and Employees Old-age Benefit Institution (EOBI). The overwhelming impression that any newspaper of the Jang Group could not publish anything against its advertisers and commercial sponsors was removed by the investigative stories we did on PIA and other corporate organizations. The News became the most quoted newspaper abroad, not only for its stories but its editorial comments and opinions. The latest such quote was in the prestigious New York Times just three days ago. The Washington Post interviewed me last week as Editor of The News.

The real reasons for failure to bring about a real visible change in Karachi are known to you. For over a year now you have been sitting on all the plans, proposals and schemes, including a Vision Document prepared after months of hard work. The scheme to revamp all the magazines has been lying on your table for months. The designs and site plans to renovate the entire newspaper office on 4th and 5th floors has been gaining dust for months and the staff is forced to work with hundreds of cockroaches creeping on papers, computers, inside telephone sets and faxmachines. In fact I have been bogged down in these totally useless exercises for most of my time, hoping that you would find time and money to start implementing any of these detailed proposals for change and improvement. You have always been promising to launch these scheme within weeks, but that time never came. I am appalled at your audacity to accuse me of being responsible for not bringing any change while the fact is that you have always been complaining of the financial crunch?in the newspaper. You have stopped increments of all the staff and played legal jugglery with all the contract employees by refusing to renew their contracts or giving them salary increases.

Even despite that I continued to work 20 hours a day to improve the editorial content of the newspaper which has been appreciated and recognized by every one, including your senior Directors and Editors of sister publications in letters written to me. The readers, however, are the best judge.

Why you never raised any objection before, and why you are doing it now, is obvious --- the Government pressure is unbearable. This is not a happy omen.

Therefore, I have to convey this sad message to you, though I feel very content and satisfied that I have taken the right decision on the basis of principles. I have decided to resign from the Editorship of The News with immediate effect, rather than to submit to Government pressure and change the policy of the newspaper. Under my editorship, I will not allow the newspaper to become the voice of any government for monetary considerations. I had given my name, credibility and reputation to The News?and I prefer to protect these precious assets, rather than my job. But I will earnestly request you not to take any action against the other colleagues you have been asked to sack, as the ultimate responsibility of whatever appeared in the newspaper was mine, as Editor, and not theirs. They should be allowed to continue with their jobs. I wish, you, the newspaper and all of my colleagues a great future.

I hereby, resign from the editorship. Please accept my resignation today and remove my name from the print line of the newspaper as of tomorrow, Saturday, March 2, 2002. I would not be responsible for the contents of the newspaper as of tomorrow.

Best Regards

Shaheen Sehbai

Memorandum

To: Shaheen Sehbai, Editor, The News
From: MSR, Editor-in-Chief
Date: 2/28/02
Re: Violation of policy



I am constrained to bring to your notice several, and repeated, violation of editorial policies clearly understood between us. Infact, these policies have also been agreed in writing. On 26th March, 2001, you had published a one sided, incorrect and libelous article against Mr. Aittiazaz Bob Din, a well known businessman residing in the United States. Although Mr. Bob Din had cited person differences between the two of you, dating back to your stay in the United States, as the motive behind the unfounded allegations against him, I had disregarded this suggestion at that time and had judged the matter purely on merit. As you will recall, you were unable to substantiate the serious charges you had leveled against him. It was only through my personal apologies and the intervention of mutual acquaintances that we were able to dissuade Mr. Din from suing the News for defamation and libel.

On two different occasions, you published unfavourable articles about PIA, which were of uncertain veracity and did not contain their point of view, as a result of which they denounced these articles in a press conference, threatened to take legal action, suspended our advertisements and also stopped putting our papers on PIA flights. Needless to say, these measures hurt us financially, damaged our reputation and took a great deal of pacification to undo.

I would also refer to the written terms of our agreement at the time of your appointment under which you are required to discuss the top stories of the day and other important editorial matters with me and seek the Editor-in-chiefs point of view and verdict on contentious issues? To my recollection, you have never deemed it fit to consult me on any matter. In this connection, I would further like to refer to our meeting on the eve of Eid in which group Editor Daily Jang was also present and we discussed the fallout of the story printed a few days earlier in the News ( again without consulting me, I might add ) which was perceived to be damaging to our national interest and elicited severe reaction by the Government. It had been agreed that we would contact relevant Government functionaries and arrange to meet with them to discuss the issue and also convey our point of view. Regrettably, you chose not to go to Islamabad and attend the meeting even though this had been clearly agreed. You even rebuffed senior Government officials who contacted you on the phone by hanging up on them. Sham Sahib and I left several messages with your assistant but again, you chose not to take or return our calls.

I would also like to take this opportunity to point out again, that it is a frequent complaint that you do not interact with people. Not only have senior Government officials protested that you are inaccessible to them, but even your own staff complains that you are hardly available for meetings, guidance and discussions.

I must convey my disappointment to you at all these issues, as I must convey my disappointment with the lack of general progress in the improvement of the News. The number of mistakes and blunders being committed, failure to follow agreed journalistic ethics - as pointed out to you from time to time by EMD have all resulted in financial set backs as well as loss of credibility for the News. I have only recounted some of the problems besetting the Jang group. It is quite evident that matters are not proceeding as we had agreed. However, before I make up my mind, I would like to hear your point of view.

I look forward to hearing from you about the serious issues that I have raised above and any solutions that you may propose.

Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman

"UNQUOTE"

REFERENCE: Why Are We Killing Ourselves? Anas Malik March 2, 2002http://www.chowk.com/interacts/5252/1/0/a