An affidavit filed by the Center in response to a petition for action against television channels for allegedly spreading false news about Tablighi Jamaat and communalizing a congregation organized by the Islamic missionary group is “evasive” and contains “pointless” arguments, the Supreme Court observed Thursday.
A bench of three judges headed by Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India (CJI) SA Bobde objected to the fact that the Center’s affidavit had been submitted by a junior official of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) and did not address no specific case. raised by the petitioners.
“You cannot treat this court this way. The affidavit is filed by a junior officer. He is also extremely evasive and says that the petitioner has not cited any cases of misinformation. Saying that you disagree with the petitioner is one thing, but how can you say that no incident is reported, ”CJI Bobde told Attorney General Tushar Mehta, who ran for the central government.
Mehta responded that he would arrange for a new affidavit to be filed addressing the concerns raised by the court and also admitted that the affidavit should have been issued by a senior government official.
The affidavit was filed by an undersecretary at the MIB in August, opposing the petition on the grounds that any action against the media could amount to a “blanket gag order” against all media outlets with respect to reporting. on the Tablighi Jamaat congregation, and violate article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution that protects freedom of expression.
In March, Tablighi Jamaat organized a religious congregation at its Markaz headquarters in New Delhi’s Nizamuddin Basti, whose participants violated established curbs, including a ban on large gatherings, to prevent the spread of the coronavirus disease. In March and April, around 900 foreigners were detained in the city for allegedly violating the conditions under which they had been allowed to visit India.
In April, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, Peace Party, the DJ Halli Federation of Masjid Madaaris and the Wakf Institute and an individual, Abdul Kuddus Laskar, filed petitions with the high court, alleging that the media were reporting on the Markaz incident in a biased way. way and demonizing the Muslim community.
The center’s affidavit said: “Such an order (to gag the media) would inevitably also affect the freedom of the citizen to know the affairs of society and the right of the journalist to ensure an informed society.”
Lead defender Dushyant Dave, who represented the petitioners, claimed that the government has claimed that the problem involved gagging freedom of expression.
“Freedom of speech is one of the most abused freedoms in recent times,” CJI Bobde commented.
On the incident in question, the Center said: “As regards the Markaz issue, Union of India has not encountered or been intimate with any specific media report that violated the provisions of the Rules of the cable television network 1994, Guidelines for Up -link from India, and the Program Code prescribed by the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act 1995 ”
The court asked Mehta to ensure that the new affidavit is filed by the clerk-level officer of the department in question.
“The clerk should tell us what he thinks of the specific incidents (cited by the petitioner). He can agree or disagree with what has been stated (by the petitioner) but he must not make unnecessary and senseless dislikes like what has been done now, ”said CJI Bobde and published the case for an additional hearing after two weeks.
The court also asked the Center to clarify which provision of the law the government could specifically use to impose a ban on the transmission of television channels.
The Nizamuddin area in Delhi was sealed off on March 30 after it came to light that several people, who had attended the congregation, were infected with the coronavirus disease. At least 16,500 people had visited the Tablighi Jamaat headquarters between March 13 and 24.
The petitioners alleged that the reporting of the incident by certain sectors of the media violated journalistic norms and the provisions of the Law on Regulation of Cable Television Networks and the Code of Programs of said Law, which prohibits the broadcast of programs that attack a religion or community and promote communalism.
The center’s affidavit said the petition had not cited any specific instance of objectionable news reporting published by any particular news outlet. It said the petition was based on opinions expressed on certain “fact-checking portals” and cannot be considered due to the doubts surrounding the veracity of the reports published by those websites and the opinions gathered by them.
“These online fact-checking portals are unregulated websites and are primarily based on the perception, guesswork, guesswork and assumptions of the person writing them,” he added.
.
