- Media houses cannot be acted against by Pemra without consulting the council of complaints.
- The right to ‘offend, shock or disturb’ has been upheld by the bench, which regards decency as a measure of ‘tolerance’ rather than taste’.
- The bench acknowledges that social norms and sensitivities evolve with time.
Karachi: In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court declared that material deemed ‘obscene’ or ‘vulgar’ is deemed offensive to commonly accepted standards of the decency. The court stated that the fundamental rights to freedom of expression and access to information extend to ideas that are not well received, but instead offend, shock, or disturb the state or any other sector of the population.
The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) filed a petition against ARY Communications Pvt Ltd over a drama serial called ‘Jalan'(broadcasted in September 2020), but the Sindh High Court rejected Pemra’s action against the channel. Pemra then appealed to the Supreme Court, but the court ruled that akistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) could only take action against the drama serial after referring the objectionable part to the council of complaints for review.
The council of complaints, established by the federal government under Section 26 of the Pemra Ordinance, must consist of citizens who will give their opinions on the matter, which Pemra or its chairman will consider before making a final decision.
What is Obscene or Vulgar?
The recent judgement emphasizes that the exhibition of any form of art or literature is a fundamental right to freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution. However, only the expression that is “offensive to the commonly accepted standards of decency” can be considered obscene or vulgar. The judgement provides guidance on what constitutes commonly accepted standards of decency.
Commonly Accepted Standards of Decency:
The commonly accepted standard of decency in a community is a “standard of tolerance, not taste.” The order explains that it is not about what people believe is appropriate for them to see, but rather what they would not tolerate others being exposed to based on the degree of harm to “public decency” or “public morality” that may result from such exposure. The contemporary standards must be used to interpret the phrase “commonly accepted standards of decency” as social mores and sensibilities evolve over time.
Assessment of Art and Literature
The judgement recognizes that art and literature, including plays and dramas broadcast on electronic media, can be powerful tools for breaking the silence on social taboos. Therefore, it should not be labeled as obscene or vulgar without considering the message it intends to convey. It should be evaluated based on whether it tends to promote or glorify conduct or behavior that is offensive to commonly accepted standards of decency or if it condemns or deprecates such conduct or behavior.
Evaluation of the Complete Play or Drama
The evaluation of the play or drama must be objective and based on the work as a whole. Picking and choosing parts here and there is not appropriate. If a part of the play or drama is too obscene, only that part should be prohibited from being broadcasted, and the rest should not be prohibited. The judgement highlights that modification may be necessary to ensure compliance with commonly accepted standards of decency.
Read also: TVs barred from live coverage of rallies, gatherings in Islamabad today
The recent judgement provides guidance on what constitutes commonly accepted standards of decency and how to assess art and literature in light of these standards. The judgement recognizes the importance of freedom of expression while balancing it with the need to maintain public decency and morality.
