Previous posts on this blog has
made it amply clear that I am not a votary of absolute freedom of expression. I
believe in reasonable restrictions on the freedom of expression when those restrictions
can be linked rationally, to the larger interests of the society.
Let me also confess that I have not
seen the programme aired by the NDTV India, on the Pathankot airbase, which
earned the one day ban for itself. This posts is not about the merits of the NDTV
programme or the decision of the Government. This post is about the procedural
justice or lack of it in arriving at the decision.
Temporary ban on broadcasting is nothing
new to Indian television. Many channels
have faced such temporary bans, usually on the grounds of obscenity and disrespect
to women. However, those channels like
Fashion TV are not mainstream and the issue involved are not of much concern to
the general public. Therefore, the public were not even aware of the ban in
most cases and even when aware were not concerned about it.
NDTV India ban is perhaps the first,
in relation to a news report. Power to ban TV channels or newspapers, vested in
the hands of the executive is surely problematic, for various reasons. Firstly,
concepts like public interest and national security are highly subjective and
prone to misuse. Secondly, criticism of the government can easily be
interpreted as one against national security. Thirdly, since the government is
likely to be at the receiving end of such news reports any decision by the
Government itself would amount to judging own affairs. Fourthly, the principles
of natural justice demand that the accused party be given a proper opportunity
to defend its case before a punitive action is taken. IN this case, NDTV India
is not given an opportunity to state its case. Lastly, objective exercise of a
power demands equal treatment of all complaints. There are allegations that the
Information and Broadcasting Ministry is very selective in dealing with complaints
against news reports.
There may be situations when a
channel reports in a manner, which compromises an operation or national
security. There is also no doubt that actions must be taken against such channels.
However, the issue remains as to who should decide whether a report is against
national security. If the Government of the day and its officers can decide and
ban a Channel, then the media freedom is surely at peril. We have seen central
ministers pontificating on the need to refrain from raising any questions even
when all the available evidences indicate blatant murder by policemen in a
staged fake encounter! Can a government act against news reports on such issues,
by holding them as against national security?
The need for an independent
authority to judge the appropriateness of a report cannot be overemphasized. A free
and fair independent media is one of the cornerstones of the democracy. Brow
beating by the executive, or undeclared bans like the one being witnessed in the
courts of Kerala, can damage the democracy itself. Therefore, the NDTV India
ban is not a trivial issue to be ignored by the society.
I am sure NDTV India will seek
legal remedies against the ban. I hope the judiciary will stand up and protect
the freedom of expression of the media, against the arbitrary onslaught by the executive.
I am also worried that my hope in the judiciary may be misplaced, considering
what is going on in the courts across Kerala. Judiciary, right up to the Supreme Court has
not, so far, shown any inclination to protect the people’s right to know and
the media’s right to report what is happening in the courts. When the Judiciary
is unable to deal with the hooliganism of a few lawyers, will it be able to
stand up to the might of Union Government and protect the guaranteed freedoms?
I would love to remain optimistic, at least for the sake of democracy.
I am not as sure about the media as a whole
standing up in solidarity with NDTV India, in this critical hour. Ideally, I
would like to see the entire news media going off the air on November 9th
in solidarity with NDTV India. Jointly going off the air is the best way to
inform the Executive that any attack on the freedom of media will be resisted,
jointly. However, the compromised corporate
ownership and selfie-journalism may prevent the media, to take such a
principled stand on November 9th.
If the judiciary and media are not
able to live up to the expectations, we the people of India will have to intervene
and play an important role. After all, when the freedom to report is curtailed it
is our right to know what is going on, is affected. If the media’s powers are
curtailed today, it will not be too long before our civil rights are also
attacked. The ‘Emergency’ is merely a term that indicates certain situation.
Even without the use of the term ‘emergency’ we might end up in an emergency
like situation, if we do not strive safeguard our own constitutional rights.
Let us, the people of India, stand
in solidarity with the right to report, right to fair trial, and right to
justice, and boycott all Television News Channels for a day on November 9th.
Let this boycott be a message to both the
executive and the media that 2016 is not 1976 and emergency like measures will
not be tolerated, anymore. Let us think above our political differences and affiliations,
and take a united stand against arbitrary decisions that affect our fundamental
rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment