Seemingly distraught over Sudarshan TV’s 10-episode program that allegedly hints that Muslims were infiltrating the civil services as part of a larger conspiracy, a bank of DY Chandrachud judges, Indu Malhotra and KM Joseph on Tuesday he had halted the television broadcast of the series, an order extended until Friday, and expressed interest in framing guidelines for electronic media.
In an attempt to curb banking enthusiasm, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting said: “Even if the CV considers it appropriate to carry out such an exercise, there is no justification for limiting this exercise to conventional electronic media only. mainstream, print media, as well as parallel media, namely digital print media and web-based digital news portals and YouTube channels, as well as major platforms (OTT). ”
Noting previous rulings, the Center said in the 2018 Common Cause ruling, the SC had said: “We believe that the central government, having formulated rules in the nature of the 1994 Cable TV Network Rules, would be well advised to frame similar rules, in exercise of the power conferred by Section 22 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act of 1995, to formalize the complaint redress mechanism, including the statute of limitations within which a complaint may be filed. complaint, and the interested statutory authority that will rule on it, including the mechanisms of appeal and reparation, leading to a final and conclusive determination. ”
The Center further stated: “While in conventional media (whether electronic or print), broadcasting / broadcasting is a one-time act, digital media has a faster reach of a broader range of viewers / readers and have the potential to go viral due to various electronic applications such as WhatsApp, Twitter Facebook.
“Taking into account the serious impact and potential, it is desirable that if the CV decides to undertake the exercise, it first does so with respect to digital media, as there is already a sufficient framework and judicial pronouncements regarding electronic and print media . ”
The ministry said that the field of balance between journalistic freedom and responsibility was already occupied by legal provisions issued by Parliament or by judgments of the SC. “This petition should be limited to a single channel, Sudarshan TV, and the SC cannot undertake the exercise of establishing further guidelines with or without the appointment of an amicus or a committee of persons as amicus,” he added.
The ministry said that the SC had already addressed the issues of “hate speech” and “regulation of the content of radio and television programs” in its 2014 and 2018 rulings. “The factual situation in each case will have to be decided on a case-by-case basis and a broader exercise that is too general in nature is neither justified nor permitted, “he said, based on the judgments.
In the Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan judgment of 2014, the SC had said: “It is desirable to establish a reasonable prohibition of unjustified actions, but difficulties may arise in limiting the prohibition to a manageable standard and, in doing so, it may cover all kinds of speech, to be avoided.
“For a long time, US courts were content to uphold laws restricting ‘hate speech’ and related issues. Lately, however, courts have changed course, thus paving the way for a myriad of rulings that align with individual freedom of expression and expression as opposed to the order of a manageable society. ”
After examining the legal provisions in force in the criminal laws, the SC had said: “The legal provisions and in particular the criminal law provide a sufficient remedy to curb the threat of ‘hate speech’. Therefore, a the aggrieved person must resort to the remedy provided in a particular statute. The root of the problem is not the absence of laws, but the lack of their effective execution.
“We therefore hereby recommend that the central government, within the framework of Section 22 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act of 1995, deliberate on the matter and make a conscious decision on the matter, and finalize a similar legal framework for radio shows as well. Until the above topic is considered and finalized, the existing grievance redress mechanism will remain in place. ”
Citing these two lawsuits, the Center told the SC on Thursday, “The parties cited above establish the correct legal position that does not require a general exercise based simply on one episode or a few episodes of a channel called Sudarshan TV.”
.
