The Sindh High Court (SHC) has expressed strong criticism towards the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) for its inconsistent position on the ban of X, formerly known as Twitter. The court’s displeasure was voiced during a hearing led by SHC Chief Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui on Monday.
The court questioned the PTA’s reversal of the Interior Ministry’s notification regarding the platform’s ban, raising concerns about whether this constituted professional misconduct or misrepresentation. Chief Justice Siddiqui demanded to know who issued the instructions for the reversal, showing frustration at the lack of consistency.
Despite a defense from the deputy attorney general that the issue was an unintentional mistake due to a heavy case load, the court remained unswayed. The possibility of contempt proceedings was indicated, with suggestions that the PTA chairman might be summoned for clarification.
The court also scrutinized PTA’s legal representation, pointing out that one PTA lawyer had previously stated that no instructions were issued regarding the ban, creating confusion.
The case has been postponed until September 24, with the court consolidating PTA’s petition with other related cases but refraining from retracting or amending its prior orders.
PTA Seeks Modification of September 12 Order
On Saturday, the PTA sought to modify or set aside the SHC’s September 12 order, which had been issued during a hearing on a petition challenging the suspension of X in Pakistan. PTA officials filed affidavits requesting the court to reconsider its order, citing a misunderstanding and confusion regarding the instructions.
The affidavits explained that the order was based on incorrect statements made by PTA’s counsel, Ahsan Imam, who had erroneously stated that the Federal Ministry of Interior had withdrawn its notification on the X ban. This statement went unopposed by the federal government’s lawyer at the time.
PTA’s counsel, Saad Siddiqui, later indicated he was unaware of this development, leading to the court’s surprise at the conflicting information.
The PTA clarified that the statement regarding the withdrawal of the notification was incorrect and attributed the confusion to the concurrent hearings of related cases. They requested the court to set aside or modify the September 12 order due to the significant prejudice and hardship caused by the misunderstanding.
The court’s written order emphasized that, given the withdrawal of the instructions and lack of other impediments, X’s ban was restored. The PTA’s recent affidavits have now added further complexity to the matter, as they seek to resolve the apparent mix-up.
