Security clearance

2024 PLD 50 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Regln. 9Renewal of licenseSecurity clearanceFederal Government, decision ofScope

Provision of Regln. 9 of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Television Broadcast Station Operations) Regulations, 2012 does not provide any space for Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) either to ignore or bypass Ministry of Interior's decision; thus it is binding on PEMRA

If such decision is not binding on PEMRA, the provision of Regln. 9 of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Television Broadcast Station Operations) Regulations, 2012 would have demanded a show cause or a notice to licensee by PEMRA on the event or situation where the security clearance was later refused or cancelled.

2018 PLC(CS) 519 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

S. 9'Security clearance'

Meaning.

2018 PLC(CS) 519 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Ss. 7 & 9Constitution of Pakistan, Arts.3, 4, 9, 10-A & 25General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S.24-AEmployees of National Command AuthorityPromotionSecurity clearanceMaxim 'Nemo firut repente turpissimus' (No one becomes dishonest all of a sudden)ScopeAudi alteram partem, principle ofApplicabilityFundamental Rights

Contention of petitioner/ employees was that no adverse entry or remarks had ever been recorded against them but they had not been promoted

Validity

Organization should have framed criteria so that no one could hold any opinion at his own rather there must be a yardstick to calculate the concept of integrity, relationship of family members, financial background, involvement of individual in any matter of moral turpitude, misconduct, crime, general repute among family members, relative and neighbours

Authority was not free in its opinion rather it had to conclude its findings on the basis of some guidelines and principles which were based upon reasonableness, fairness and for the advancement of the purposes of strategic organization

No one could become dishonest all of a sudden

Nothing was on record that petitioners/employees were dishonest or any issue of integrity had been reported against them

Petitioners/employees had not been confronted with any report, material or document where the question of integrity or security had been breached

Principle of natural justice (audi alteram partem) had been violated which was sufficient to vitiate the whole proceedings

Concept of security clearance based upon intelligence reports could be used in the cases of promotion of the officers but principles of fairness and reasonableness was foundation of all the system of Government

Constitution guaranteed the equal protection of law, elimination of exploitation and safeguards against any kind of discrimination

National Command Authority Act, 2010 could not supersede the concept of Fundamental Right

Any material which came in the way of promotion of petitioners/employees collected by the intelligence agencies had to be confronted through some internal mechanism if same was not confidential in its nature

If such material was confidential and it would affect the working of such kind of strategic organization then Authority should follow a procedure to dis-engage the services of such officials

Authority could not exercise its powers in an unbridled manner without disclosing the reasons and factors under the garb of term 'security clearance'

Nothing was on record which could be used against the petitioners/employees while denying the right of promotion

Reason put forward by the authority under the garb of term 'security clearance' was not sustainable in the eye of law

Junior officers of the organization had been promoted to the next higher grade without considering the promotion of petitioners/employees

Petitioners/employees were entitled for the relief of promotion since their junior colleagues had been promoted

Employees were declared to be entitled for promotion in their appropriate grades with effect from the date their juniors had been promoted with all consequential benefits

Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances.

2017 PLD 661 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

S. 30-ABroadcasting station licenceSecurity clearance

Appellant company was aggrieved of the order passed by authorities denying security clearance issued by Inter Services Intelligence (ISI)

Validity

Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority wrote letter to the Federal Government to process case for security clearance of appellant and Federal Government requested the Authority to furnish particulars of Directors and the same was complied with

Subsequently Federal Government issued letter regretting the clearance without any reason and justifications

Such refusal was passed without hearing appellate company

Letter regretting security clearance by Federal Government was without any reasons and justification whereupon order in question was based

High Court set aside letter in question and remanded the matter to Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority to verify security clearance issued by the authorities

High Court directed Federal Government to issue fresh letter in respect of security clearance with detailed reasons and justification and matter was to be decided afresh

Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.