×
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Don't stifle the media

Last Updated 03 May 2012, 16:48 IST

Let Chief Justice Kapadia not go down in history as someone who undertook an exercise that was detrimental to press rights.

The Supreme Court of India is known for its independence and being protector of the constitution. The press owes it a lot for the freedom the media enjoys. But when the apex court tries to meddle in its professional work, it arouses doubts (about its role as a protector), and it is something which is being tried in the guise of a petition before the court.

I have a great respect for Chief Justice of India S H Kapadia. His integrity is beyond reproach and I have often mentioned his name for the appointment as India’s first Lokpal. But lately, I have been disappointed over the unrelenting way in which he is trying to ram down guidelines to instruct the press on reporting the proceedings of the Supreme Court.

I mean no offence to him when I say that he looks like a person who is going hammer and tongs at the media. It seems that he is determined to have the guidelines although they violate the fundamental right under Article 19 (1) on freedom of the press. Perhaps he feels hurt about a wrong story about his son that appeared in a newspaper. But the remedy is to take action against that particular newspaper, not against the press on the whole.

That the media has not maintained standards to which it adhered to for years is something which many journalists feel themselves. But then this is the problem which the media itself has to sort out. It does not mean that the court should interfere. Reporting on court proceedings is an arduous assignment which is given to experienced hands. Just as in the judiciary, all judges are not of the same calibre, journalism too suffers from the same limitation.

In fact, the harm that the judiciary can do is worse than the media is capable of doing. A wrong judgment—and there have been several—plays havoc compared to the mistakes a news story would do. It can be rectified, unlike a wrong judgment which stays until a superior court or a bigger bench changes it. The apex court is not infallible, however supreme, and it has made mistakes in the past. Why to pick on the media?  The judiciary and the media have an important role to play. If one is the second estate, the other is the fourth. Both have jointly thwarted assaults on freedom, essential to sustain the spirit of democratic polity.

I concede that we in the media make more mistakes than the judiciary. Still the remedy is not to guide it. You do not throw the baby with the bath tub. Those found guilty of misreporting the court proceedings or holding media trials should be pulled up. The case can be referred to the  Press Council. A bona fide mistake is understandable but not a motivated reporting.

Code of ethics

The Editors Guild of India has laid down a code of ethics and it has often discussed self-regulation. Still there are aberrations. This does not mean that the Supreme Court should clamp down on the right to know. The sword of contempt of court is always hanging over the head of journalists while reporting legal cases. The guidelines are another way of putting restrictions which the free press cannot accept.

Senior counsel Anil Devan is quite right when he says: “Article 19 (1) (a) includes the right to know and the right to be informed. Media (print and electronic) are the eyes and ears of the citizen and unless media freedom to report court proceedings is protected the right to know is impaired.” If the court still insists on guidelines, it must approach Parliament which alone can legislate on such matters. Parliament too would have to ensure that it does not whittle down the freedom guaranteed to the press under the constitution.

India’s first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru was unhappy over incorrect or speculative reports which appeared in the press. His viewpoint, as he expressed at the All India Newspapers Editors’ Conference as back as on December 3, 1950, was: “I would have a completely free press with all the dangers involved in the wrong use of that freedom than a suppressed or regulated press.” The Supreme Court has itself given many judgments to uphold the media’s right to say.

Chief Justice Kapadia has said that it is not the question of freedom of the media, but if the media is used to destroy someone’s reputation then what is the remedy? He is talking about the motivated reporting which none in the media upholds.

Yet the media trial he is apprehending has been able to get justice in the case of Jessica Lal murder and earlier the a cinema house tragedy which killed many people. Similarly, the Commonwealth Games scams would not have come to light but for the media’s meticulous investigation.

There can be no rules or guidelines in such cases. Each case is different and as the time passes, the media men will become more experienced and the judges less sensitive. Let Chief Justice Kapadia not go down in history as someone who undertook an exercise that was detrimental to the rights of the press. Democracy can be endangered, even unwittingly.

ADVERTISEMENT
(Published 03 May 2012, 16:48 IST)

Follow us on

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT