Previous 2 / 3 Next

Pag e}• --- ••- .~ Case Judgement I I I I I I I I -AR Y News. Ch. Muhammad Usman for Respondent No.6 -Dawn News. Ghulam Abbas Heral for Respondent No.7 s, Cybercrimes, FIA and Ms. Misbah, Rukhsana and Zeeshan, Assistant Director Sub-Inspector. ORDER ar Ahmad, Additional Attorney SHAHID JAMIL KHAN, J.-M irza Nas e t Director, Cybercdme FIA request som General, assisted by Ms. Rukhsana, Assistan inal orig the of having capability to identify more time to answer the Court's quarry social media. source of uploading an audio or video on identifying such person or source, In case FIA does not have capability of why ther it is available intemationaIJy. If yes, learned AAG shall apprise the Court whe its capacity. has the Federal Government not updated ntal right of privacy by recording and 2. The infringement of the fundame tilayer proposition. The basic questions are: uploading the audios and videos, is a mul l, can be allowed to intrude and Whether any agency, Federal or Provincia videos? trespass the privacy for recording audio or rity, an agency intrudes into privacy, (ii) Even if, on the pretext of State secu used for any Civil or Criminal action whether the material so collected, can be under the law. unqualified fundamental right, can be (iii) Freedom of speech, being not an the unqualified fundamental rights of allowed to be exercised, when it infringes dignity and reputation. e of higher degree) and making such Breach of privacy must be a felony (crim as the state by invoking criminal laws as well material public should be intolerable by damages. Though our laws dealing with by society, by resorting to civil laws for less to be reconciled and improved, neverthe Electronic and Print Media are required inal crim a for ect of 2016") addresses the subj section 19 ofthe PECA Act, 2016 ("Act action, which is reproduced:er with dishonest intention commits "19. Unauthorized interception.---Whoev ns ofunauthorized interception by technical mea to be and is not open to the public, from a. Any transmission that is not intended or within an information system; or information system that are carrying data b. Electromagnetic emissions from an r description for a term which ma; shall be punished with imprisonment of eithe (i) 1 l ontent21 .asp?Casedes=2024L25 Io http://www.pJsbeta.com/LawOnline/Jaw/c 11/7/2024 8:52:59 AM I I

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Hamna Qaiser Vs Chairman PEMRA and others

Case Law

Country

Pakistan

Country Location

Latitude: 30.50420402694667

Longitude: 71.31445294618544

Country Location (linked Case Law): Pakistan

Decision Date: Jun 2, 2023

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Admissible

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Judgement in Favour of Plaintiff

Keywords

Privacy
Social Media

Judicial Body: First Instance Court

Court Name: Lahore High Court

Case Number: 2024 MLD 243

Case Summary: The petitioner raised concerns over the unauthorized publication of private audio and video materials on social media platforms, claiming it constituted a breach of privacy. The petitioner argued that such actions, carried out without permission and lacking identifiable sources, infringed on personal privacy and should be actionable under both criminal and civil laws. The petitioner emphasized the need for legal provisions to address such privacy violations by penalizing unauthorized uploads and requiring platforms to take accountability. The petitioner highlighted that the phrase "with dishonest intention," often required to trigger action by regulatory bodies, should not hinder them from promptly addressing these violations. In instances where the source and lawful purpose of sharing the materials are unclear, it was argued that dishonest intent should be presumed, with the burden of proof shifted onto the person sharing the content.

The High Court acknowledged the severe impact of unauthorized sharing of private content and underscored that such breaches of privacy should be deemed a felony. The court directed the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) to take criminal action against individuals uploading such material from within Pakistan. If the material was posted from abroad, the PTA was instructed to notify international platforms, such as YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook, to request removal of the content. The court clarified that while electronic material may be admissible as evidence, it requires a higher standard of verification than traditional evidence, particularly in the absence of clear source information or ownership.

Additionally, the court mandated that any actions taken to remove or report such materials be publicly documented and recorded as part of the official measures against privacy breaches. The court adjourned the petition, emphasizing the need for swift regulatory action to protect privacy rights in the digital age.

Related Law

Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 (Act no. 40 of 2016)

Collection

Primary Documents

Hamna Qaiser vs Chairman PEMRA and others.pdf
English
Download View

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

Select target paragraph3

Hamna Qaiser Vs Chairman PEMRA and others

Primary Documents

Notifications