ISLAMABAD: What is described as arbitrary actions, the Council of Pakistan Newspaper Editors (CPNE) and All Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS) flayed the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) raid and subsequent action against the Pakistan Broadcasters Association (PBA). Both the bodies urged the commission to immediately reverse the “arbitrary” actions against a body that is a legitimate functioning part of a free and fair press under Article 19 of the Constitution.
In a joint statement, CPNE President Mujeebur Rehman Shami and APNS President Hameed Haroon said that they objected to the arbitrary and unreasonable actions of the CCP that accompanied the covert investigation against the apex broadcasters’ body.
“By all means the press is open to a CCP investigation of all unfair trade practices, if any. We uphold this facet of the CCP’s function. But the meaningless and self-serving press release by the CCP after its action mentions two frivolous charges – the first, that a centralised clearance system has been operating for the financial recovery of media dues against defaulting advertisers, including government – a system that exists in over one hundred countries of the world, and indeed has existed in Pakistan well before 1947. The second charge is equally absurd, where the PBA is accused of fixing rates of commissions to advertising agencies at 15 per cent (although obviously not the quantum of advertising commissions themselves) – a standard practice that is carried out in almost all the countries of the world, and is far older than the creation of Pakistan.
“Clearly the CCP has got it deeply wrong, and particularly when they accompany this with the draconian actions of arriving virtually unannounced to impound the entire legal record of the PBA. The bona fide of this cat-and-mouse action are highly questionable. The CCP could have asked for the required information which the apex body of the broadcasters would have provided willingly. And never has the PBA ever refused to provide the information, which has never been asked for.”
The CCP press release states that section 4 of the Competition Act “prohibits decisions by an association of undertakings that may prevent, restrict, or reduce competition in the relevant market.” We ask: “Has the CCP ever considered the rate centralising and rate fixing taking place by the Press Information Department in the Federal Ministry of Information, Broadcasting and National Heritage in this context? Surely there appears to be a major legal asymmetry here.
