Updated: September 18, 2020 11:02:23 pm
The issue is fundamentally political and we should not pretend that subtle legal distinctions will solve the problem. The great lesson of the last two decades is that an over-reliance on legal instruments to solve fundamentally social and political problems is often counterproductive.
Taking a strong objection to the Bindas Bol Sudarshan TV program claiming to expose a “conspiracy to infiltrate Muslims into government service,” the Supreme Court said on Friday that a message should be sent to the media that “a particular community cannot be attacked” in name of investigative journalism and that the “The country cannot survive with such an agenda.”
The apex court, which has prevented Sudarshan TV from broadcasting the remaining episodes of the show, also detained the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and the National Broadcasting Association (NBA) for their alleged inaction and requested suggestions from the Center and the NBA to strengthen the “self-regulation mechanism for electronic media.”
Asked if the media can be allowed to “target a whole set of communities” and “alienate” them by making these kinds of stories, the bench headed by Judge DY Chandrachud said: “describe all candidates as if they were executing an agenda shows the type of hatred (against the community) ”.
“This is the real issue. Whenever you show them joining the civil service, you show ISIS. It means that the incorporation of Muslims into the civil service is part of a deep-rooted conspiracy. Can the media be allowed to interfere? lead a whole set of communities, ”asked the court, which also includes judges Indu Malhotra and KM Joseph.
“Here freedom of expression turns into hatred. You cannot mark all members of the community. You also drive away good members with a divisive agenda, ”he said.
Editorial Express | The show vilifies Muslims, but previous restraint sets a dangerous precedent when dissent is criminalized
On Tuesday, the high court had blocked Sudarshan TV from broadcasting the remaining episodes of the show, stating that the purpose of the show was “to vilify the Muslim community.” He had observed that the program had made arbitrary claims “without regard to the truth.” On August 28, the court had refused to impose a “pre-broadcast interlocutory injunction” on the show. An episode of the show aired on September 10, the day after the central government gave it the green light on condition that there was no “violation of the program code.”
Earlier today, the court told chief advocate Shyam Divan, who was representing Sudarshan TV, that the court has no problem with the story about investigative journalism on the financing of terrorist-linked organizations, but it cannot be said that the Muslims are carrying out some agenda by going for UPSC services.
“Let a message get to the media that you cannot attack a particular community. We have to ensure a nation of the future that is cohesive and diverse, “he said, adding,” that this message reaches the media that the country cannot survive with that agenda. “We are a court and we see what happened during the emergency and it is our duty to ensure that human dignity is preserved,” the court said.
During the videoconference hearing, Divan said the channel has no problem with any individual from any community joining the public administration by merit.
“The channel wants to complete the transmission. We are not running anywhere. As for the four episodes being watched in their entirety, then a swear word here and there shouldn’t ignite the jurisdiction of this court to impose a pre-broadcast ban, ”she said.
While clarifying that it is not the “censorship board”, the court observed that some of the “offensive content” should be removed from the broadcast. “Some of the photos hurt us, like the green T-shirts and hats,” the bank said.
“We know what a court order will look like. I’m afraid there will be a lot of injunctions and we don’t want it to be the law of the land. We want to give your client a good faith option, ”the court said.
The court asked Suresh Chavhanke, the channel’s editor-in-chief, to submit an affidavit by Monday expressing his voluntary and good faith decision not to use certain things on the show.
Divan said the program raised issues as sources of funding and reserves for CBOs from the Muslim community. “The question that arises is whether you do not enjoy a double benefit,” he told the court, adding that “the point of view that makes someone uncomfortable is the very basis of democracy …”
Referring to the affidavit submitted by Chavhanke, Divan said that the channel used the term ‘UPSC Jehad’ based on information that the ‘Zakat Foundation’ received funds from various “organizations linked to terrorism.”
“It is not that all contributors to the Zakat Foundation are linked to terrorism. However, some of the contributors are linked to organizations or are organizations that fund extremist groups. The funds received by the Zakat Foundation, in turn, are used to support applicants to IAS, IPS or UPSC, ”he stated in a 91-page affidavit.
The court then asked the Zakat Foundation, an NGO that trains students for public administration, if it wanted to intervene in the case in which Sudarshan TV has made accusations that it receives foreign funds from organizations linked to terrorism.
Top advocate Sanjay Hegde, who appeared on behalf of the Zakat Foundation, said the NGO was a charity that performed social service and only paid fees for IAS classes, the PTI news agency reported.
(PTI inputs)
📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay up to date with the latest headlines
For the latest news about India, download the Indian Express app.
© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd
.
