Insulting armed forces should be legally banned in Pakistan

[Safriz]

Either you have a democracy in which criticism, taunts and insults against political figures and institutions is allowed, or you don’t.

The example you cited is of a school board firing someone, not the state or federal government outlawing speech. US free speech is protected by the first amendment. I can also sit here in London and very freely insult the queen. In fact there was an old Labour MP Dennis Skinner who made a tradition of insulting the queen or her representative while sat in the chamber.

You should be able to criticise, ridicule and insult any politician/party/institution in Pakistan, including the army. As for the argument that the army is apolitical, the hilarity of that statement aside, one should also be able to criticise departments and institutions too. If one can make fun of NAB, SBP, etc, same should apply to the army.

It's another thing that you are equating banks and stock exchange or post office with Army.
None of whom lose lives and limbs for the country, only the army does.

Going by your argument the army also has every right to behave as just another government institution and soldiers have the right to behave as another federal government employee?
Same as PIA or steel mill or railway employees?
Take wages and do nothing?
Same as the employees of the federal institutions you named, the soldiers and officers of military are also grade 5 to 22 employee of federal government and should behave same as those other employees of those instructions you named?
Why die for the country?
Why fight for these people?
Take wages and go home.
Leave a scare crow in border post and go sleep home, same as thousands of government servants are doing.
Then what will happen?

 

[Joe Shearer]

criticism should be allowed with proper ethics

Criticism, but not abuse. 'The lowest of the low'? Even if the right of free speech is invoked, such a statement should allow the maker to be sued for libel.

 

[Safriz]

Hello spectators, In this thread you can watch:
All knowing righteous intellectuals are talking about everything else but not topic.
Also take tips on how to prove whether someone was either good or bad human through "Funeral pictures"
Free Pakistan history lessons from 1947 and who and what was right and vice versa.

Please don't expect objective dialogue and answers to crucial questions like:
How and what would define "insult" in legal terms?
How are lines of freedom of expression and crossing that lines defined around the world, based on case studies and religious background?
Is insulting head of or board of governor of institution etc. same as insulting institution? should it be included?
How the law of act would comply with existing constitutional rights already defined?

Oh sorry I didn't know we are all here to waste time and misplace frustrations and personnel opinions.
Bye.

Ok bye

 

[Jungibaaz]

Please don't expect objective dialogue and answers to crucial questions like:
How and what would define "insult" in legal terms?
How are lines of freedom of expression and crossing that lines defined around the world, based on case studies and religious background?
Is insulting head of or board of governor of institution etc. same as insulting institution? should it be included?
How the law of act would comply with existing constitutional rights already defined?

Oh sorry I didn't know we are all here to waste time and misplace frustrations and personnel opinions.
Bye.

You’re asking for too much expecting some people will think this far ahead. There’s a reason why free speech provisions in constitutions are almost absolute (extreme), it’s by design to prevent even the slightest unintended oppression of speech. OP’s making the moral argument to police one aspect of speech that he thinks is unbecoming given our national identity and moral character, or that which he perceives of us and projects. Never mind the mechanics, the principle itself is faulty. Historically, those who enforced no criticism of the army came in as dictators, so existing constitutional rights, defining legally what makes speech illegal - these logical issues never bothered them at all.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You’re asking for too much expecting some people will think this far ahead. There’s a reason why free speech provisions in constitutions are almost absolute (extreme), it’s by design to prevent even the slightest unintended oppression of speech. OP’s making the moral argument to police one aspect of speech that he thinks is unbecoming given our national identity and moral character, or that which he perceives of us and projects. Never mind the mechanics, the principle itself is faulty. Historically, those who enforced no criticism of the army came in as dictators, so existing constitutional rights, defining legally what makes speech illegal - these logical issues never bothered them at all.

It has to be admitted, however reluctantly, that you are right. I would not say that the principle is faulty, however; to me, the principle is unworkable.

 

[Rusty]

NO
NO
NO
and
NO

we are not a fascist regime.
For all you people who want to ban this and that, move to China.
They have banned everything, that will be your heaven.

 

[Yaseen1]

i think it is very difficult to implement this as those people involved in this have very good support from west and our establishment not want to make west much angry by muting voice of such people

 

[Safriz]

You’re asking for too much expecting some people will think this far ahead. There’s a reason why free speech provisions in constitutions are almost absolute (extreme), it’s by design to prevent even the slightest unintended oppression of speech. OP’s making the moral argument to police one aspect of speech that he thinks is unbecoming given our national identity and moral character, or that which he perceives of us and projects. Never mind the mechanics, the principle itself is faulty. Historically, those who enforced no criticism of the army came in as dictators, so existing constitutional rights, defining legally what makes speech illegal - these logical issues never bothered them at all.

The high chair you and other commenters speaking from, doesn't apply to Pakistan as people here are not mature enough.
Also soldiers don't give up their citizenship by joining the army. So stop treating them as foreigner.
FYI insult without proof is libel and defamation and against the law.
Applies to soldiers too.

 

[Rusty]

The high chair you and other commenters speaking from, doesn't apply to Pakistan as people here are not mature enough.
Also soldiers don't give up their citizenship by joining the army. So stop treating them as foreigner.
FYI insult without proof is libel and defamation and against the law.
Applies to soldiers too.

I would rather have the unwashed masses have freedoms then giving power to a few elites.

It's not like we can look at history for countless examples of what happens when you give so much power to a few elites.

 

[Goenitz]

Imperial Russian Empire in the 1800s which is ages ago but in 1979 USSR

Regime changes but mindset not. though people improve.. You can even see even today how russia took over Ukraine and Crimea.. China could not help in 80s against soviets if they had settle in AFG.
Anyway, on topic. Sedition law must be abolished.. it is remnant of Colonial powers.

 

[Safriz]

It has to be admitted, however reluctantly, that you are right. I would not say that the principle is faulty, however; to me, the principle is unworkable.

In Pakistan the young kids are ignorant and stupid at the same time. They don't know how to do constructive criticism.
It's libel and baseless allegations all the way.

I would rather have the unwashed masses have freedoms then giving power to a few elites.

It's not like we can look at history for countless examples of what happens when you give so much power to a few elites.

You live in USA .
Try insulting CIA or US army for 9/11 and see what happens.

 

[Jungibaaz]

It's another thing that you are equating banks and stock exchange or post office with Army.
None of whom lose lives and limbs for the country, only the army does.

Going by your argument the army also has every right to behave as just another government institution and soldiers have the right to behave as another federal government employee?
Same as PIA or steel mill or railway employees?
Take wages and do nothing?
Then what will happen?

Moral standards are a bit different, I agree. But you can’t be the judge of who is deserving of criticism and who can’t be by default. There will always be glaring exceptions in each case. Morally corrupt and bankrupt generals among an army with martyrs and public servants in its rank, and on the other end you’ll have corrupt and unscrupulous scoundrels in civilian institutions among honest workers and people who work equally hard in service of the nation. You can’t be the one to draw the line on which is the exalted group or persons, and which are fair game for criticism. And then comes the added challenge of what defines an insult worthy of criminal prosecution, and what’s questionable but allowed.

It’s much easier and better therefore, to have free speech. And in fact, you don’t really have democracy without it.

And I don’t believe that the army should be above criticism as a principle. It’s another matter that our history and current picture is full of things for which to rightly criticise the army about.

You live in USA .
Try insulting CIA or US army for 9/11 and see what happens.

He can do it freely, he can that the CIA are a bunch of jackasses, and I in the UK can say that the Queen is an old hag and MI5 are a bunch of dopes. In democracies, this is legal.

People might react negatively to me saying these things but it cannot be outlawed.

 

[Old School]

 

[Rusty]

In Pakistan the young kids are ignorant and stupid at the same time. They don't know how to do constructive criticism.
It's libel and baseless allegations all the way.

You live in USA .
Try insulting CIA or US army for 9/11 and see what happens.

I actually live in Canada
And I did/have
In fact you can find any mainstream news sites doing the same.

 

[Safriz]

I actually live in Canada
And I did/have
In fact you can find any mainstream news sites doing the same.

Sure, keep doing it at the same level as you do against Pakistan army and get stripped of your Canadian citizenship. Guaranteed.