Updated: September 19, 2020 9:29:39 am
“This may be a good time to implement some self-regulation,” said Judge Chandrachud and asked Attorney General Tushar Mehta for suggestions.
The Supreme Court said Friday that it had to step in and stay transmission from the “UPSC Jihad” program on Sudarshan News on September 15 because “no one was taking any action.”
“The Supreme Court leaving something is like a nuclear missile. But we had to intervene because no one was taking any action, ”said Judge DY Chandrachud. A government official, he added, “just wrote a letter, that’s all.”
Attorney General Tushar Mehta told the court that electronic media issues “are already being addressed in a broader sphere.”
“This may be a good occasion to implement some self-regulation,” said Judge Chandrachud and asked the SG for suggestions.
Although he agreed to help the court, Mehta urged the court to limit the present matter to Sudarshan News and not expand it to frame rules for all electronic media, as that question is pending before a court headed by CJI SA Bobde.
The bench, also made up of judges Indu Malhotra and KM Joseph, frowned at some images used on the show and said they are “offensive” and “hurtful” and should be removed. The court asked the channel’s editor-in-chief, Suresh Chavhanke, what he intended to do to quell concerns if the court considered his request to resume broadcasting of the show.
Referring to the arguments in the petition, Judge Chandrachud said it shows flames in the background of a clip that shows speeches and characters with green hats, beards and T-shirts.
“They wonder why the IAS and IPS Association do not act when [AIMIM MP Asaduddin] Owaisi asks Muslims to join the civil service and the flames are shown in the background… there are comments like haramkhor…. Graphs are shown about a growing number of Muslims in the civil service and there are pictorial representations, ”Judge Chandrachud observed.
Judge Malhotra said she also felt the flames in the background and the green jerseys were “offensive” and “removable.” “Some of these photographs hurt us a lot. So they should be dismantled, ”Judge Malhotra said.
Judge Joseph said that in one episode, a member of the audience is interviewed and he says that Muslims are receiving reservation from OBC and should not receive more. “What message are you sending? In short, you are smearing an entire community.”
Judge Chandrachud said: “We are not playing the role of a censor. Therefore, we will give you the opportunity to say what you want to do. Without the court telling you what to do, you must come and tell us what you will do…. Let the market for ideas flourish in India. “
He added: “We have to protect freedom of expression. We also have a constitutional duty to protect human dignity. That is equally important. “
Appearing on behalf of Chavhanke, Chief Defender Shyam Divan said he will present an affidavit explaining what he intends to do.
The court’s remarks came as Divan urged the court to lift the suspension imposed by him on the television broadcast of the remaining episodes of the show. He noted that there is a danger that a court may issue precautionary measures.
“Today there is no such law regarding the prior restriction. There is a justifiable danger in introducing it through a constitutional court, because the constitutional courts are there to demarcate the area and protect freedom of expression, ”Divan said. “What the SC can do, the Superior Courts will also do tomorrow.”
Judge Chandrachud said the court is not in favor of the previous restrictions. “We support freedom of expression. Tomorrow there will be an abundance of injunctions in the civil courts. We don’t want that to happen, ”he said.
Divan said his client was conducting an investigative report on alleged terrorist ties to some of the organizations that gave donations to the Zakat Foundation, which trains aspiring civil service workers. He stated that “it is not that all the contributors to the Zakat Foundation are linked to terrorism. However, some contributors are linked to organizations or are organizations that finance extremist groups. “
Judge Chandrachud noted that he was free to do any investigative article if he believed it was a national security issue. “The difficulty arises when, on that basis, an entire community is implicated as part of some conspiracy to destabilize or capture the public administration…. This becomes the real problem, ”he said.
Divan also touched on the situation throughout LAC with China and said that Indian soldiers face hostilities. “You saw [The] Indian Express story about a Chinese company that tracks our people? … When this is pointed out, it does not mean [a] The journalist is demonizing that country…. The other question I have raised is whether Muslims should have the benefit of being a minority and being members of the CBO. The question is if this is not a double benefit, an unfair advantage that is enjoyed ”.
Judge Chandrachud said the reservation issues are complex and can be debated.
Divan said the show is based on limited sampling and that one has to see it in its entirety and not in parts. “I have said many times that a gentleman from any community who comes and joins the civil service is welcome…” Divan said. He said Chavhanke had “expressly said so over the course of the show.”
Divan also said: “I think that a curse here or something else is not something that should ignite the prior restraining order of this court…. [The] The nature of the television medium requires simplification… nobody said that the clips are manipulated… they are trying to persuade the viewer of a particular point of view…. It is probably journalism that does not meet the high standards of journalism, but not enough to ignite the power of the court to pre-restraint, ”he said.
Judge Chandrachud noted that there may be cases where some students go to some training centers because they cannot afford the expensive ones. Attributing reasons to all of them because some funds are not valid would be wrong, he said. “It’s really a cause for concern because this is where you go from free speech to hate … then it becomes counterproductive … because it alienates them with this divisive propaganda,” added Judge Chandrachud.
Judge Joseph said that every community would want to have a stake in power, to “capture power.” “Everyone wants to be part of the power structure. There’s nothing wrong…. It is marginalizing people who should integrate, ”he said.
Divan said: “I totally agree … (on) the individual right to have a perception of a program. Other viewers also have the right to know their perception. “
Judge Chandrachud referred to an earlier court decision in which he had asked the government to set rules. He asked SG Mehta what happened to him.
Mehta responded that there was no legal backing for sanctions then; therefore, the rules would have been vulnerable to challenge. Now a new law has been framed and put into the public domain inviting public comment, she noted. She said it has different types of penalties.
📣 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.
.
