• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Trending:
  • Kashmir
  • Elections
Monday, June 22, 2026

Daily Times

Your right to know

  • HOME
  • Latest
  • Iran-Israel war
  • Gilgit Baltistan Election
  • Pakistan
    • Balochistan
    • Gilgit Baltistan
    • Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
    • Punjab
    • Sindh
  • World
  • Editorials & Opinions
    • Editorials
    • Op-Eds
    • Commentary / Insight
    • Perspectives
    • Cartoons
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Featured
    • Blogs
      • Pakistan
      • World
      • Lifestyle
      • Culture
      • Sports
  • Business
  • Sports
  • E-PAPER
    • Lahore
    • Islamabad
    • Karachi

Staff Report

LHC seeks report from Fisheries & Labour Dept over protection of fisher folk

Published on: October 11, 2018 6:19 AM

The Lahore High Court on Wednesday asked the Fisheries & Labour Departments to show what measures they were taking to protect Punjab’s fisher folk from debt bondage.

The court was hearing an application from the Fisheries Department asking for the vacation of the stay granted against the auction of leases on Punjab’s public waters. The challenge has been rejected pending a further hearing on October 24, 2018.

Main case proceedings will begin on November 29.

Asking for a vacation of the stay, the assistant advocate general argued that that the stay was against the rules of the Fisheries Department and the interests of the government. He also argued that it would result in a loss of Rs 100 million in revenue.

The government lawyer argued that the existing rules of the Fisheries Department provide a complete mechanism for fishing communities. He said that the existing department rules of fishing allow fishing communities to apply for fishing licenses, which they had not done so. He also argued that the petitioners had not used the existing mechanisms of redressal by not applying for fishing licenses and not asking Bonded Labour Vigilance Committees to improve their conditions.

The lawyer for the petitioners, Syed Ghazanfer Shah, argued that there were around 600,000 bonded fisher folk in Punjab, who would suffer irrevocable losses if the auction lease system was re-instated. He argued that the fishers had enjoyed their ‘first month of freedom after decades of debt bondage’ fishing for themselves after the LHC granted a stay against the auction of fishing leases on August 18.

He argued that this was one of first cases in the world of bonded labour on a public resource. He said that this perverted the fundamental character of public waters as a public trust held by the state for the benefit and welfare of its citizens.

He argued that the existing license system was only for recreational fishing, such as angling, but it did not apply to traditional fisher folk who had been fishing for centuries and for whom fishing is a livelihood, requiring the use of larger nets and boats, a point which the government counsel accepted.

He said that the petitioners were part of the Sindu Bachao Tarla, which had been campaigning against the lease auction system for over two decades. They had exhausted all avenues of redressal and were now turning to the LHC for relief.

The learned counsel also argued that this was a case of bonded labour as a consequence of the Fisheries Department’s leasing policies and according to law, it was the task of the Fisheries Department to prove that this was not the case. It was the task of the state to abolish bonded labour and not aid and abet it, which makes the stay necessary.

LHC judge Shujaat Ali Khan asked the Fisheries Department what protections were being offered to traditional fishing communities under the auction system.

The government counsel argued that the lease auction system was like landlords, who own land and keep workers who know how to till the land. He argued that just because the tillers work the land it does not give them rights in the land but just in the crop.

The learned counsel for the petitions replied that the example fundamentally misunderstands that privately owned land is different to a public resources in waters that are held as a trust for public welfare and benefits. He further argued that historical fishing communities have fishing rights in the public waters, which are being violated.

Published in Daily Times, October 11th 2018.

Filed Under: Punjab

Submit a Comment




Primary Sidebar




Latest News

Oil prices fall after US, Iran talks ease supply fears

Breaking Bad actor Giancarlo Esposito embraces Islam in Saudi Arabia

Starmer may announce exit plan as Labour leadership pressure grow

Bring E-Commerce Catalog Images Alive

Three killed in rare school shooting in Philippines

Pakistan

Illegal kidney transplant operation uncovered in Kasur

Govt restores speed limits on motorways, highways

Geo-tagging of 838,555 manholes completed

SC converts death sentence of rape convict man to life imprisonment

PPP Senator Sherry Rehman seeks wider debate on telecom amendment bill

More Posts from this Category

Business

PIA enhances free baggage allowances, connectivity options on Beijing routes

NA approves over Rs 661.27 billion demand for grants of energy sector

Mango exports shrink as Middle East war impacts linger

Economic stability indicators improving despite external shocks: APBF

Govt asked to review indirect tax-driven revenue model

More Posts from this Category

World

Starmer may announce exit plan as Labour leadership pressure grow

Three killed in rare school shooting in Philippines

Hajj 2027

Online registration opens for Hajj 2027 pilgrims

More Posts from this Category




Footer

Home
Lead Stories
Latest News
Editor’s Picks

Culture
Life & Style
Featured
Videos

Editorials
OP-EDS
Commentary
Advertise

Cartoons
Letters
Blogs
Privacy Policy

Contact
Company’s Financials
Investor Information
Terms & Conditions

Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
Youtube

© 2026 Daily Times. All rights reserved.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.