Justice Babar Sattar of the Islamabad High Court, commenting on the audio leaks case, remarked that there is no law for phone tapping and that what is happening is entirely illegal.
He stated that they would not begin the farce of in-chamber hearings and that he would issue contempt of court notices to the PTA Chairman and Board members. He emphasized that if telecom companies are providing citizens’ data without scrutiny, they are equally responsible. During the hearing of Najam-ul-Saqib and Bushra Bibi’s combined petitions, Additional Attorney General Munawar Iqbal Duggal stated that an intelligence agency’s competent officer requested the data, and the Sindh High Court’s decision in 2013 prompted the introduction of a new policy. The Ministry of Interior issued an SOP allowing ISI and IB to obtain data from service providers directly. At the same time, other law enforcement agencies could request data from these agencies when necessary. Justice Babar Sattar questioned how the Ministry of Interior had this authority, pointing out that a section officer issued the SOP without mentioning the relevant authority.
Sattar Questions Sindh High Court’s Ruling
Justice Babar Sattar queried whether the Sindh High Court’s decision applied solely to a single case or constituted a permanent order. The court inquired from the PTA lawyer about the basis on which the PTA issued directives. Federal Police lawyer Tahir Kazim stated that, to their understanding, there is no restriction on obtaining this material. The court emphasized that people need to understand how their privacy is being invaded and highlighted that even the courts are unaware of their actions. The Additional Attorney General suggested holding in-chamber hearings. Which Justice Babar Sattar rejected, clarifying that he was only asking about the law, not national security secrets.
During the hearing, the federal government requested the removal of restrictions on telecom operators providing data. Justice Babar Sattar questioned who told the IG not to take warrants and criticized Parliament for creating such laws. He instructed the telecom company’s lawyer to record the correspondence regarding the PTA’s directives. Emphasizing that such matters involve detailed directions and cannot be done verbally. He reiterated that any telecom company assisting in phone tapping is acting illegally. As no law prohibits phone tapping or surveillance. If telecom companies provide citizens’ data without scrutiny, they are equally responsible. He would also issue show-cause notices for contempt of court to the PTA Chairman and Board members. Islamabad Police lawyer Tahir Kazim requested permission to obtain CDRs for investigation purposes. To which Justice Babar Sattar stated he would make an appropriate order.
The court adjourned the hearing of the audio leaks case. With the next hearing date to be issued in a written order.
