Authorities on Monday called on broadcasters to refrain from covering dozens of banned groups, including Jamaatud Dawa, the alleged charitable wing of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) militant group blamed by the Indians for the 2008 Mumbai attacks. The order follows the introduction earlier this year of the National Action Plan against terrorism aimed at reining in militancy inside the country after Taliban gunmen methodically killed more than 150 pupils and staff at the Army Public School in Peshawar in late 2014. The directive issued by the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) prohibits broadcasters from covering the activities of 72 different outlawed groups, including JuD. The LeT has been blamed for carrying out the attacks in the Indian financial capital in 2008 that killed 166 people. It is well known by now that in the event of a natural disaster in the country, religious organisations — among them some whose disavowal of armed militancy is suspect — quickly mobilise their cadres to fan out across affected areas to undertake disaster relief. Often, and unfortunately so, their experience in grass-roots activism gives them an advantage over government agencies in terms of effectiveness.This is once again being witnessed in the aftermath of the earthquake that jolted Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and other parts of Pakistan last month. Reporting their activities cannot in any way be regarded as incitement to, or glorification of, violence — which is where the Pemra directive defies reason. It is possible that this ‘ban’ emanates from the authority’s overzealous application of the legal provisions pertaining to media conduct. It may even stem from the establishment’s desire to excise indications of the state’s apparently dual policy towards extremist organisations from the official narrative of a no-tolerance policy against such forces in the country — although the interior ministry has denied any input. Though this is welcoming move There are plenty of other ways to disseminate messages of hatred in these connected days, and many of the banned groups are skilled manipulators of the internet and the opportunities it offers, as well as the ubiquitous mobile phone services across the land. So-called ‘banned’ groups re-brand themselves and carry on regardless, usually under the noses of the government agencies that banned them in the first place. For most, if not all of the groups on the Pemra list, it will be business as usual, ban notwithstanding. There is a sense that this latest effort in the battle against extremism is cosmetic, and the government expects little or nothing by way of measurable outcomes, let alone the eventual downfall of any of the listed 72 groups. The ban passes the buck to the broadcast media and is one of those look-busy-do-nothing exercises that are a feature of the current government. If the government wants to really ban these organisations, then it needs to do a lot more in concrete terms, but shuffling the problem sideways serves nobody well.
pk.shafaqna.com
