FCC to Hear Under-16 Social Media Curbs Plea on Nov 6
The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) will hear a public interest petition on November 6 seeking under-16 social media measures to restrict access to social media platforms by children below 16 years of age. Notices have been issued to the federal government and other respondents to appear before a three-judge bench headed by Justice Aamer Farooq.
The other members of the bench are Justice Rozi Khan Barrech and Justice Syed Arshad Hussain Shah. The hearing will be the first time the petition is taken up by a bench after a long procedural dispute about whether it could be heard at all.
What the under-16 social media petition asks for
The petition, filed by Supreme Court lawyers Sheraz Zaka and Moin Akhtar, argues that Pakistani children are being exposed to cyber bullying, addictive platform design, sexualised content and the glorification of alcohol. The petitioners say those exposures harm children’s mental and moral development.
It claims that no Pakistani law currently mandates age verification for social media access. The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca), 2016, contains no specific restriction for users under 16, the petition argues.
The petition asks the FCC to direct the federal government to amend Peca 2016 to restrict social media access for under-16s, with an age-verification mechanism. It also asks the court to order the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) to strictly enforce content standards during child-viewing hours.
A further request seeks a direction for coordination with social media platforms on parental controls, and action on out-of-school children and dropout rates. The petition alleges that Pemra failed to enforce its own code of conduct, allowing dramas and advertisements containing intimate scenes and alcohol depictions to air during hours when children are likely watching.
Why the case reached a bench only now
The petition has already survived one procedural hurdle. Earlier, Justice Farooq, in a chamber hearing, overruled a registrar office decision in which the petition had been declared not maintainable. The judge allowed an appeal and ordered the office to fix the hearing.
That distinction matters. The registrar’s decision was an administrative step, not a ruling on whether under-16 restrictions are right or wrong. The appeal argued that questions about maintainability, legal standing and alternative remedies are judicial questions, to be decided by a court after hearing the petitioners. Justice Farooq accepted that argument, which is why the case is now listed before a three-judge bench.
The November 6 hearing, therefore, does not itself create a ban. No nationwide under-16 social media ban exists in Pakistan at present. The bench will first have to decide how the petition proceeds, and any restriction would still require legislation, regulation or a court order that follows a full hearing.
A wider debate in Pakistan’s courts
What to watch on November 6
Frequently asked questions
What will the FCC hear on November 6?
The Federal Constitutional Court will hear a public interest petition seeking measures to restrict social media access for children below 16, including an age-verification mechanism and stricter content enforcement by Pemra.
Who filed the petition?
Supreme Court lawyers Sheraz Zaka and Moin Akhtar filed the petition. A registrar office decision declaring it not maintainable was overruled by Justice Aamer Farooq in a chamber hearing.
Does Pakistan already ban social media for under-16s?
No. No Pakistani law currently mandates age verification for social media access, and Peca 2016 contains no specific under-16 restriction. The petition asks the court to direct the government to amend the law.
Which countries does the petition cite?
The petition cites Australia, Italy and Brazil as countries that have already imposed under-16 social media bans, arguing that such regulation is feasible and necessary.
What happens if the bench admits the petition?
Admission would mean a full hearing on the merits, with arguments from the petitioners and the respondents. It would not, by itself, create a ban. Any restriction would still need legislation, regulation or a court order after that hearing.
