SC rejects Justice Qazi Faez's Isa request to broadcast hearing live

• Supreme Court rejects Justice Qazi Faez Isa's request for live coverage of hearings.
• Justice Isa says he wants to know names of judges who were for and against request to have case broadcast live.
• Last month, Additional Attorney-General Aamir Rehman told the SC that the federal government is opposed to Justice Isa's request for live coverage.

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) rejected on Tuesday a petition seeking live coverage of the Justice Qazi Faiz Isa case.

By majority vote, six judges of the apex court rejected the request of Justice Isa to broadcast the hearing of the case, while four judges supported broadcasting the hearing live.

The court said a detailed decision on the petition will be issued later.

Read more: Pakistan being destroyed in a systematic manner: Justice Qazi Faez Isa

The dissenting note of the verdict said that court proceedings should be uploaded on the SC website and audio recordings of cases of public interest should be uploaded on the website without being edited as access to information is a basic right of the public.

The court said how it decides to give access to information is an administrative matter.

When the verdict was issued, Justice Isa said he wanted to know the names of the judges who were for and against the request to have the case broadcast live.

Read more: Govt opposes Justice Isa's plea for live coverage of review petition

On this, Justice Umar Ata Bandial said that if he [Justice Isa] reads the verdict, he will know the names.

'Judges speak through their decisions, not on television'

Last month, Additional Attorney-General Aamir Rehman told the SC that the federal government is opposed to Justice Isa's request for live broadcast of review petition proceedings.

Rehman had argued that live coverage would lead to a public debate on the conduct of judges.

"Judges speak through their decisions, not on television," he said.

He said it was feared that court decisions with a live coverage would not be legal and would be based on popularity.

Addressing the AAG, Justice Bandial remarked that his arguments were strong and need to be reviewed.

The AAG said media houses would not be able to take a stand on either side due to their institutional policy.

He said Justice Isa has argued that live broadcasts would educate the people but "if law students did not learn from books, what would they learn from live broadcasts?"