(PPF/IFEX) – Rashid Channa, a reporter for the “Star”, a Karachi evening daily published by the Dawn Group of Newspapers, was arrested by police on the afternoon of 24 July 2005 and detained for about 12 hours before being released at 1:00 a.m. (local time) the following day. On 25 July, Channa was charged with […]
(PPF/IFEX) – Rashid Channa, a reporter for the “Star”, a Karachi evening daily published by the Dawn Group of Newspapers, was arrested by police on the afternoon of 24 July 2005 and detained for about 12 hours before being released at 1:00 a.m. (local time) the following day. On 25 July, Channa was charged with “attempted murder” of a person he claims he had never heard of before.
A statement released by the Dawn Group claimed Channa was detained on the orders of Mohammed Ali, secretary of Arbah Ghulam Rahim, chief minister of Pakistan’s southern province of Sindh.
The statement added that Channa’s detention appears to be linked to stories he wrote about the Sindh government and the conduct of its chief minister. His arrest appears to be the latest in a series of steps taken by the Sindh government against the Dawn Group of Newspapers.
The Dawn Group noted that in an abrupt move six weeks ago, the Sindh government, on the chief minister’s orders, banned all government advertising in the group’s publications, in an attempt to silence critical opinions expressed in the group’s newspapers and magazines. The “Star” also expressed fear that Channa’s arrest may be the first in a series of arrests of journalists and senior management personnel of the Dawn Group.
The Council of Newspaper Editors (CPNE) and All Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS) strongly condemned the arrest. Karachi Union of Journalists (KUJ) President Ayub Sarhandi and General Secretary Nizam Siddiqui also denounced the detention.
“If the government has any objection to any newspaper or journalist, then instead of harassing or arresting them, a proper charge sheet must be issued and such cases must be sent to a court of law,” they said, while noting that the action was contrary to press freedom and freedom of speech.