fbpx
21.2 C
Islamabad
Monday, April 29, 2024

UK Court Declares Activist Bankrupt Following Legal Defeat Against Geo/Jang

The Pashtun nationalist activist, Shah Muhammad, was ruled bankrupt by a UK court after he was unable to pay the £20,000 (about Rs. 7.3 million) legal fees and lost the defamation lawsuit against this journalist, Geo TV, Daily Jang, and others.

Following the loss of a defamation lawsuit against the aforementioned businesses, a UK high court ordered Shah Muhammad, also known as Shah Mehmud, to pay around £20,000 to Geo and Jang in March of this year. Instead of fulfilling the judgment, Shah Muhammad provided reasons for his inability to pay. At a bankruptcy hearing last week, Shah Muhammad was informed by District Judge Revere of the Country Court at Central London that he would face bankruptcy if he did not follow the court order. The hearing was arranged by lawyers from Geo.

District Judge Revere has ruled that Shah Muhammad, residing on Dangola Road, London, E13 0AZ, with an unspecified occupation, is officially declared bankrupt. During the court proceedings, Shah Muhammad informed the judge of his debt exceeding £20,000, proposing a monthly payment of £10. However, the judge denied this request and pronounced him bankrupt. The bankruptcy status is slated to remain on Shah Muhammad’s record for one year. Shah Muhammad’s bankruptcy comes on the heels of his unsuccessful legal pursuit against Geo, following a fruitless claim related to a report by this correspondent. The report covered a protest by Afghan demonstrators outside the Pakistan High Commission in London in May 2021. 

The demonstration, involving hundreds of protestors, escalated into chaos as some individuals engaged in violent acts, including hurling stones and water bottles at the Pakistan High Commission building. The demonstration took place shortly after the Taliban took control of Afghanistan and overthrew President Ghani’s government. In the process, this reporter and Geo News cameraman Naseer Ahmed were attacked. Declaring himself a journalist and human rights advocate, Shah Muhammad made up allegations that he was named as one of the protest’s purported organizers and was therefore wrongly accused of defamation in the report. Furthermore, he contended that the report’s language implied, in an implicit manner, that he was a terrorist. 

He attempted to invoke the definitions of terrorism and enemy agent as found in Pakistan’s Anti-Terrorism Act 1967 and the UK Terrorism Act 2000, as well as The Enemy Agents Ordinance 1943. Not a single mention of Shah Muhammad was made in the piece that appeared on The News, Jang, and Geo’s websites. The Shah Muhammad claimed was not the “Shah Mahmud Khan” listed in the report. While Shah Muhammad told the court that he was also called Shah Mahmud Khan by some friends, he did not object to the report and said that this was defamatory. This was a fraudulent claim with no basis in reality, the reporter informed the court. 

During the London High Court hearing, the defense attorneys effectively argued for the revocation of Shah Muhammad’s Claim Form. The case was dismissed for several grounds, including the application of Section 10 of the Defamation Act 2013. Master David Cook, the judge, dismissed the claim after agreeing. Shah Muhammad’s full legal costs—roughly £20,000, including VAT—must be paid, the judge said. Shah Muhammad was informed by the judge during the delivery of the verdict that there was disagreement about whether he was included in the article and that he had interpreted it too broadly to assert that he had been labeled a “terrorist” despite there being no such claim in any of the publications. 

Shah Muhammad requested the ability to appeal, but the judge turned down his request. Shah Muhammad is identified as a journalist and human rights advocate who also hosts a show on Facebook and YouTube. He has affiliations with Pashtun nationalist and human rights organizations, such as the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement and Pakhtoonkwa Milli Awami Party. However, it is important to note that none of these groups are connected to the defamation allegation in question.

Latest news
- Advertisement -spot_img
Related news