The National Assembly’s Standing Committee on Home Affairs has approved a bill proposing two years’ imprisonment and a fine of up to Rs 500,000 against those who criticize the armed forces and their personnel. The case will go to court.
The National Assembly’s Standing Committee on Admissions has approved a bill proposing two years imprisonment and a fine of up to Rs 500,000 against critics of the armed forces and their personnel. I will pursue the case.
The Criminal Law Amendment Bill was considered by National Assembly Member Amjad Ali Khan in a meeting of the Standing Committee on Admissions of the National Assembly chaired by Raja Khurram Shehzad Nawaz on Wednesday.
Amjad Ali Khan said in the committee meeting that the state enforces its own laws and according to the proposed bill, a case will be filed in the civil court for mocking the Pakistani forces.
Explaining the Criminal Law Amendment Bill, he said, The inclusion of 500A in the law does not contradict any other law while the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government has objected to the proposed law without any argument.
PTI MPA Amjad Ali Khan further said that Fifth Generation War is going on in the country while in the former FATA there is talk of cross-border army and institutions.
Objections to the bill
During the meeting, PPP committee member Agha Rafiullah objected that the law would be used for political revenge.
He said: Criticism of institutions in good faith will also come under the purview of this law. That is how you are restricting freedom of expression.
At the same time, he raised the question: Why are we making sacred cows?
Agha Rafiullah added: You are abusing Parliament and our institutions. Even 2% of the 220 million people of Pakistan are not against the institutions but we stand with our institutions like a leaden ply wall.
On the other hand, committee member and PML-N leader Maryam Aurangzeb said There should be a comparison between the laws that protect the armed forces in the constitution. If there are already laws in the constitution, it will be an abuse of law and order.
He asked, Wouldn’t this law apply to people sitting abroad? Members are confused at this point.
Raising further questions, he said, “Why is this law being introduced? Why would Pakistani citizens deliberately provoke Pakistani institutions?
According to Maryam Aurangzeb: The institution is also being made controversial in this bill. The purpose of introducing this law is to show that the institutions are being provoked. There is a law of defamation and there is a law of freedom of expression
He added: The proposed law shows an intention that is not good for the institutions themselves. If all the provinces do not want to respond, then why is the committee trying to pass this law.
Maryam Aurangzeb added This is a private member’s bill. The private member should read Article 19.
Amjad Ali Khan, a member who introduced the bill, clarified on these objections that the law was not being brought against anyone. “No one is more loyal to the country and the army than I am,” he said. There must be a consensus on this, we are making our own institutions controversial
He added: I protest that I have been told that the law has been proposed for personalized advertising. It’s not like that, we have to do something to solve these problems of the army.
Commenting on this, PML-N MPA Pervez Malik said, “We do not oppose this law but we want to make it transparent.
During the meeting, law ministry officials commented on the bill, saying Article 19 deals with freedom of expression but can be regulated by law.
He added: Section 500 is a defamation suit. Parallel to the proposed law is a case of treason committed by the federal and provincial governments.
On which the government officials present on behalf of the Interior Ministry said that the Interior Ministry ratifies the proposed law.
After hearing all the discussions, Chairman Home Committee Raja Khurram Nawaz called for a vote on the bill. Four out of 10 members present in the meeting opposed the bill while the chairman of the committee supported the government, after which the bill was passed in the committee.
