Stifling the press

THERE is no democracy without accountability of power — and how is accountability possible if one is punished for speaking up? Such is today’s dilemma as press freedom goes through yet another tough phase, with lawfare, enforced disappearances, online campaigns, harassment, and harsh financial tactics employed against those attempting to express opinions deemed unfavourable to the power wielders. The Constitution lists press freedom as a fundamental right in Article 19, which deals with freedom of speech; hence it establishes an intrinsic link between the two. An independent press has been traditionally cited as the ‘fourth pillar’ of the state in addition to the executive, legislature, and judiciary, effectively cementing the role of the press in holding accountable all three conventional pillars of a democratic state. Further, an independent press informs the citizenry of events and issues, and provides analyses so that citizens can shape their own opinions. Hence, the right to access to information, especially relating to matters of public importance, is protected by the right to information under Article 19-A of the Constitution. Social media has become a powerful avenue for the expression of views, empowering citizens across the country. With access to the internet and growing literacy, citizens are taking on the role of independent press outlets by participating in public conversations. Unfortunately, attacks on individual speech have increased simultaneously. In the past few weeks, we have seen Pakistani authorities arrest a citizen for a satirical comment about the blockade of the capital for the US-Iran talks. This is tantamount to punishing one of the most potent cultural characteristics of the Pakistani internet user: humour. Journalists have borne the brunt of the state’s wrath as the government started to take its mediation efforts in the US-Iran crisis seriously. A concerted online campaign against Matiullah Jan led to him losing his job as TV talk sho