LAHORE: The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) has reported that many journalists over the past several months have complained of interference in their work.

At a press conference in the Lahore Press Club on Monday, the HRCP representatives spoke about the commission`s f act-finding report to be m ade available soon on the extent and nature of curbs on the freedom of expression across Pakistan, especially where media was concerned.

Additionally, sales and distribution agents have corroborated the Dawn management`s complaint of unlawful interference in distribution of the newspaper across the country.

According to the report, respondents who chose to remain anonymous have also referred specifically to the state and/or intelligence agencies.

During the meeting, it was clearly stated that HRCP would communicate to these agencies whatever concerns were expressed across the media, while complying strictly with respondents` request for anonymity.

Meanwhile, interviews carried out with distributors in Balochistan, Punjab and Sindh corroborated assertions by Dawn that disruptions and intermittent closures in commercial establishments and residential areas associated with the military have had a serious impact on business. Following the publication of an interview with former prime minister Nawaz Sharif on May 12 this year, sales agents allege that the distribution of Dawn is disrupted daily in at least 20 targeted cities and towns specifically in cantonment areas and army offices and schools.

Hawkers are reportedly being subjected to continual harassment, threats and physical coercion while attempting to deliver copies of Dawn toregular subscribers.

This has been accompanied by the withdrawal or suspension of advertisements: Dawn reports that since October 2016, it has suffered a complete ban on advertising from commercial enterprises that are directly or indirectly managed by the military, including DHA.

Meanwhile, the HRCP has documented at least three instances in which cable operators in Punjab and Gilgit-Baltistan say they were compelled to take certain channels off air.

In each case, they received a telephone call from persons identifying themselves as state or intelligence agency officials, warning them to `remove` Geo TV from the list of channels being transmitted or to move it to the very end, thereby making it less accessible.

Respondents said they had no choice but to comply for fear their business would be closed down or attacked.

As far as the television channel management was concerned, the prevailing uncertainty surrounding their ability to broadcast means they stand to lose long-term advertising contracts.

The general perception among TV channels is that, if a media house as prominent as Geo TV can be targeted then they too can be easy targets. They have little choice but to fallinline.

Verbal press `advice` is oftenreceived either on the telephone or during a visit, where media houses or reporters are told that some subjects should not be published or broadcast.

Interviews reveal that the most commonly tabooed subjects are: missing persons, the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement (PTM), Baloch separatists and rights activists such as Mama Qadeer, the Panama trial and NAB references, the disquahñcadon and arrest of Nawaz Sharif, references to any questionable decisions by the judiciary, allegations of judicial overreach and questions about the armed forces.

At least two respondents report having been warned that news transmissions must use the words `criminal` or `convicted` rather than `former prime minister` to qualify Nawaz Sharif. Other topics unpopular with the establishment, at least three respondents have claimed, include criticism of the Pakistan Tehreek-iInsaf (PTI). Respondents in both the print and broadcast media say that the advice may be issued by civil bureaucrats, the office of the DG Press and Information or directly by the ISPR, often relayed through the management.

At least four television or radio journalists report that in addition to communicating directly with `errant` journalists, state or intelligence agencies tend to approach channel or newspa-per owners directly, threatening their channel/publication or parent business with NAB or FIA cases or suspension of advertisements unless they agree to abide by certain conditions.

Many print and broadcast journalists say that a common consequence of `disobeying` instructions is vicious character assassinations through anonymous social media accounts and social networking platforms that go so far as to incite violence against media persons and in the case of women, rape threats.

In at least two cases, respondents in the print media say they were called in for questioning by state or intelligence agencies and interrogated about international funding and contact with separatists.

At least seven editors and reporters in GB have testified to receiving press advice and being threatened with dire consequences including threats of arrest and violence if they do not comply. Most say they are warned against giving coverage to nationalists and reporting negatively about state institutions and government departments. In one extreme case, an editor and publisher, who did not comply despite being offered bribes and his life threatened hve times, was accused of being on the payroll of foreign spy agencies. A case was registered against him under the Terrorism Act and he was arrested.

He remains in prison.

The HRCP called on the federal and provincial governments, and all other state institutions and services to take due notice of the complaints it has presented, take appropriate steps to prohibit and prevent unauthorised, illegal and unlawful interference in freedom of expression in the country; to protect the rights of news media owners, that there should be no interference on the sale and distribution of any newspaper, or channel and `advice` or `instructions` should be stopped.

HRCP representatives stated that complete and effective information commissions were set up in each province to implement the state`s obligations under the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017.