Paper: II
Topic: Indian polity, Constitution, Freedom of expression, Supreme court.
Relevance and use of the article in UPSC prelims and mains examination:Dear aspirants this article is about the recent decision of the central government to ban NDTV India has raised concerns regarding the rights of free press in India. Mostly, people are using the ‘freedom of speech & expression’ interchangeably with the rights of a free press. But are both one and the same?The constitution of India guarantees freedom of speech and expression to all its citizens under Article 19, which deals with protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.Let's go through the article and find out the viability of recent decision.
Introduction:
- Clause (1) (a) of Article 19 states, “All citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression.”However, the Indian news press enjoys the freedom to engage in the business of disseminating news to audience under the right to carry out any profession, occupation, trade, industry or business, guaranteed under Article 19(1) (g).
- Complications arise when Article 19(1) (a) and (g) are read to be one and the same and even the oversight and restrictions in the interest of the 'general public' contemplated under Article 19(6) are ignored because of this obfuscation.
Role of media:
- Entities such as NDTV engaged in the business of news/media are a prime source of information, helping people to cultivate opinions on the political, economic and social situation in the country. The traditional print media still retains influence and television is widely popular, but public opinion, especially of the youth, can be gauged through social networking platforms and the so-called 'new media'.
- In this way, the media continues its role as a kind of non-formal educator, helping citizens to make judgments, often by presenting views which are contrary to those of the government.
Governments stand:
- This vaunted position occupied by the media, including surveying the judiciary, executive and legislature alike, does not come without implicit responsibilities. Hence, the restrictions on the business of news/media under Article 19(6), when deemed necessary to ensure an effective protection of the rights of common citizens under Article 19(1) (a).
- Though this is being cited as the first incident where the government has censored the media in the interest of national security, recent history is rife with examples of the government curtailing media freedom to protect the general public interest.
- Far from regulation of media by the government, at present, the Indian media industry is a largely self-regulated consortium. The informal nature of this self-regulatory mechanism only adds to the risk of an unregulated vital sector such as media falling prey to priorities and practices which could be contrary to public interest or as well be a threat to national security.
Media Regulation Bill: A much needed regulation
- The call of the hour is a composite code/piece of legislation in the media business space, one that will protect the freedom of press under such law but will also prevent media sector from impinging on the freedoms and rights of citizens of India and acting against public interest or national security in any manner.
- A draft bill on media regulation called the Maintenance Of Transparency and Code of Conduct and Prevention of Circulation, Publication or Broadcasting of Misleading Information by any Entity engaged in Circulation, Publication or Broadcasting of News. by this bill an attempt was made to strike a balance between self regulation and a statutory oversight wherever and whenever such self regulation fails to protect the interests of the citizens of India, public interest and national security.
- While endorsing and encouraging self regulation in the media space compulsorily, the bill suggests the establishment of an authority governed by a board comprising a retired high court judge and two members, i.e. a joint secretary and an eminent person. Most important of all, the bill suggests that no serving editors be on the board.
- The bill provides the board with the power to take suo motu action as well as the power to impose a penalty for code of conduct violations as well as the violation of transparency disclosure norms, thus strengthening the existing self-regulatory mechanism.
- It further suggests the establishment of an appellate authority headed by a retired supreme court judge, a former secretary in the government of India and another member, all of whom can be removed from their posts for specified reasons only after an enquiry by the SC.
Much needed freedom of press:
- The necessity of a free press to democracy is incontrovertible and enshrined in law and constitution in the India. The quality of that freedom, however, requires to be cautiously guarded so as to not infringe upon citizens rights, public interest or national security.
- Freedom has many components and is rarely absolute or paramount in a democracy, if only, because democracy may itself be thought of as a system for reconciling competing freedoms. The press wields a unique power of impacting public opinion and plays a vital role in democracy. This power, however, must be exercised in tandem with other democratic values. Chief amongst these is the stipulation that press freedom promotes, and operates within, the rule of law which itself is often described as the cornerstone of a democratic society.
Conclusion:
- In a modern democracy that abides by the rule of law, press freedom can never mean a press which sits outside, above and beyond, or in disregard of, the law. Respect for the law is the common framework within which the press, as an important commercial sector, is enabled to flourish, to preserve and enjoy its freedoms, and to make its unique contribution to a democratic society.
- The rule of law, in other words, seeks to also ‘guard the guardians’ and self regulation in the media space needs to ensure that media entities are mindful of their duty to be on the right side of the rule of law.
Question:
“The necessity of a free press to democracy is incontrovertible and enshrined in law and constitution in the India. The quality of that freedom, however, requires to be cautiously guarded so as to not infringe upon citizens rights, public interest or national security.” Comment.
Suggested points:
- Discuss about the current decision of government about banning a News channel.
- Constitutional provisions about freedom of speech and expression.
- Differentiate between the constitutional provisions for press and common public.
- Role of regulation rather than banning.
- Media Regulation Bili and its importance with provisions.
- Role of government, and media to form a good mind set of information for general pibic.
- Suggestions and conclusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment