OPINION: Contempt of Court Act a deterrent to freedom

In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has quashed the Centre's telecast ban on Malayalam news channel MediaOne and pulled up the Ministry of Home Affairs for raising national security claims in its action in the matter. Last Wednesday, a Bench, headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, set aside the Kerala High Court order, which had earlier upheld the Centre's decision to ban the channel's telecast, and observed, "Press has a duty to speak truth to power and present citizens with hard facts enabling them to make choices that propel democracy in the right direction. The restriction on freedom of Press compels citizens to think along the same tangent... Homogenised views on issues that range from socio-economic polity to political ideologies would pose great dangers to democracy."

The verdict of the apex court in the case is indeed appealing from the viewpoint of the freedom of Press, one of the most essential conditions for the success of any democracy. Some observers say the verdict protects our media from arbitrary action of the State against it. It bars the use of undisclosed national security considerations as a pretext to shut down any media outlet. The judgment ends the government's traditional resort to its 'sealed cover procedure' in the court to evade its accountability in the matter. It suggests an alternative approach for the government to claim immunity for its action on banning any publication. It has said that the relevant material must be disclosed to the affected party so that the latter can effectively exercise its right to appeal.

One, however, finds that in order to really exercise its freedom, the Press in India needs not only the removal of some unreasonable State controls over it but also reforms within itself (media). Like it or not, the nature of the media in the country continues to be elitist. The professional leadership of our media hardly reflects the country's pluralistic social character to voice the needs and aspirations of the entire country. Way back in 1945, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, one of the leading architects of the Indian Constitution, said: "The Untouchables have no Press... The staff of the Associated Press in India, which is the main news distributing agency in India, is entirely drawn from the Madras Brahmins-indeed the whole of the Press in India is in their hands." This holds true to a great extent even today.

According to a recent estimate, 90 per cent of leadership positions in our media are occupied by upper caste groups. Another estimate has it that, of the four most important English national dailies, three are owned by Vaishyas and one by a Brahmin family. Almost 90 per cent of the decision makers in the English language print media and 79 in television are from the upper caste. Of them, 49 per cent are Brahmins. Not one of them is Dalit or Adivasi.

Also, there has been no dearth of professionally corrupt elements in the Indian media. They masquerade as journalists to serve interests other than journalistic. Only a few years ago, a media report revealed that some newspaper editors lobbied with the ministers to push for certain personnel changes.

In addition to the reforms within to exercise its freedom in a constructive manner, the Press needs the removal of some unreasonable judicial controls as well over it. Our judiciary is equipped with the Contempt of Court Act, 1971. It can be used to deter journalists from reporting some hard facts about the judiciary. The Act provides for civil and criminal contempt. Civil contempt can be invoked in case of wilful disobedience to any judgment, order or direction of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court. Criminal contempt can be invoked against publication of any material or commission of any act against courts.

In order to make the freedom of Press really meaningful, the court could declare the Contempt of the Court Act archaic and undemocratic in contemporary India. In a 1964 case, then Chief Justice of India P.B. Gajendragadkar rightly cautioned against frequent or indiscriminate use of the power of contempt and observed, "Wise judges never forget that that the best way to sustain the dignity and status of their office is to deserve respect from the public at large by the quality of their judgments, the fearlessness, fairness and objectivity of their approach and by the restraint, dignity and decorum which they observe in their judicial conduct."

(Jagdish N. Singh is a senior journalist based in New Delhi. He is also Senior Distinguished Fellow at the Gatestone Institute, New York)

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of OneIndia and OneIndia does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.