sign in sign up
<<
Home , Ajit (newspaper), Bidarur, Cobrapost, Dalveer Bhandari, Harish Salve, Homai Vyarawalla

PRESS COUNCIL OF

Annual Report (April 1, 2011 - March 31, 2012)

New Printed at : Bengal Offset Works, 335, Khajoor Road, Karol Bagh, -110 005 Press Council of India Soochna Bhawan, 8, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110 003 Chairman: Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Editors of Indian Languages (Clause (a) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 5) NAME ORGANIZATION NOMINATED BY NEWSPAPERS Shri K. S. Sachidananda Editor’s Guild of India, All India , Murthy Editors’ Conference and Daily, Samachar Patra Sammelan Kottayam, Kerala Shri Shravan Kumar Garg Editor’s Guild of India, All India , Newspaper Editors’ Conference and Hindi Daily, Hindi Samachar Patra Sammelan New Delhi Shri Jagjit Singh Dardi Editor’s Guild of India, All India Charhdikala, Newspaper Editors’ Conference and Punjabi Daily, Hindi Samachar Patra Sammelan Patiala, Punjab Shri Sheetla Singh Editor’s Guild of India, All India Janmorcha, Hindi Newspaper Editors’ Conference and Daily, Faizabad, Hindi Samachar Patra Sammelan Uttar Pradesh Shri Anil Jugalkishor Editor’s Guild of India, All India Daily Amravati Agrawal Newspaper Editors’ Conference and Mandal, Amravati, Hindi Samachar Patra Sammelan Shri Bishambhar Newar All India Newspaper Editors’ Chhapte-Chhapte, Conference and Hindi Samachar Hindi Daily, Patra Sammelan Working Journalists other than Editors (Clause (a) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 5) Shri Rajeev Ranjan Nag National Union of Journalists, Press India News Weekly, Association, Working News New Delhi Cameramen’s Association and Indian Journalists Union Shri Uppala Lakshman National Union of Journalists, Press Samayam, Association and Working News Telugu Daily, Cameramen's Association Shri Arvind S. Tengse National Union of Journalists, Press Photo Journalist, Association and Working News Freelancer Cameramen’s Association Shri Kosuri Amarnath National Union of Journalists, Press Freelance Journalist, Association, Working News Hyderabad Cameramen’s Association Shri Kalyan Barooah National Union of Journalists, Press / Association, Working News The Tribune Cameramen’s Association and Indian Journalists Union NAME ORGANIZATION NOMINATED BY NEWSPAPERS Shri Sondeep Shankar National Union of Journalists, Press Photo Journalist, Association, Working News Freelancer Cameramen’s Association and Indian Journalists Union Shri Arun Kumar National Union of Journalists, Press / Association and Working News of India, Cameramen’s Association Patna Owners and Managers of Big, Medium and Small Newspapers* (Clause (b) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 5) Shri Vijay Kumar Chopra Indian Newspaper Society Punjab , Hindi Daily, , Punjab Shri Sanjay Gupta Indian Newspaper Society , Hindi Daily, New Delhi Shri Gurinder Singh Indian Newspaper Society, All India Indian Observer, Small and Medium Newspapers English Daily, Federation and Association of Small New Delhi and Medium Newspapers of India Shri V.K. Chopra Indian Newspaper Society, All India Filmi Duniya, Small and Medium Newspapers Hindi Monthly, Federation and Association of Small Delhi and Medium Newspapers of India Dr. R.I. Lakshmipathy Indian Newspaper Society, All India Health, Small and Medium Newspapers English Monthly, Federation and Association of Small Tamil Nadu and Medium Newspapers of India Vacant —— Managers of News Agencies (Clause (c) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 5) Shri Neeraj Bajpai United News of India Joint Editor, United News of India, New Delhi Nominees of University Grants Commission, Bar Council of India and Sahitya Academy (Clause (d) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 5) Shri Rajeev Sabade University Grants Commission Shri Milan Kumar Dey Bar Council of India Shri A. Murthy Sahitya Academy Members of Parliament Nominated by Speaker, and Chairman, (Clause (e) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 5) **Kumari Meenakshi Natarajan (Lok Sabha) Shri Harin Pathak (Lok Sabha) Shri (Lok Sabha) Shri (Rajya Sabha) Shri Prakash Javadekar (Rajya Sabha) Secretary : Smt. Vibha Bhargava *Notification of remaining one member under clause 5(3)(b) awaited ** Resigned on January 23, 2012 Contents Foreword Chapter I Review 1 Chapter II Adjudications in Complaints Regarding Threats to 88 Press Freedom Chapter III Adjudications in Complaints Filed Against the Press 98 Chapter IV Finances of the Council 2011-2012 110

Annexures A Statement of Cases April 1, 2011- March 31, 2012 132 B Colloquium Report-Delhi Declaration 133 C Gazette Notification dated June 15, 2011 139 D Gazette Notification dated October 5, 2011 146 E Graph of Adjudications 2011-2012 147 F Report on Visit of Press Freedom Commission 148 of South Africa Delegation on Research Mission to India on November 23, 2011 G Subject Index of Adjudications in Complaints 150 Regarding Threats to Press Freedom (2011-2012) H Subject Index of Adjudications in Complaints 154 filed Against the Press(2011-2012) I Index of Principles Recorded in Adjudications 165 in Complaints Regarding Threats to Press Freedom J Index of Principles Recorded in Adjudications in 166 Complaints filed Against the Press K Subject Index of Orders Passed by the Press and 168 Registration Appellate Board (2011-2012)

Foreword

My association with the Press Council began on October 5, 2011 when my eminent predecessor Justice G.N. Ray demitted office after about six and half years’ distinguished service to the institution. It has now been almost six months since I took over as Chairman of the Press Council of India. I must admit that I have gained greater insight into journalism and journalistic practices in the past months. The concept of a body established to promote ethics in the media and simultaneously safeguarding its interests is important to the progress of a democratic country. In a democracy, issues are ordinarily resolved by discussion, persuasion and dialogue and that is the method to be preferred, rather than using harsh measures. Whereas 90 per cent of the problems can be resolved in this way, in exceptional cases, where a section of the media proves incorrigible despite trying the democratic method mentioned above, harsher measures may be resorted to. The matter was taken up by me with the Prime Minister requesting for amendment in the Press Council Act by bringing the electronic media under the purview of the Press Council (which may be renamed the Media Council) and by giving it more teeth- e.g. giving the power to suspend government advertisement or in extreme cases even the licence of the media houses for some time. As Goswami said: “Bhaya Bin Hoe Na Preet”. This, however, should be resorted to only in extreme cases and after the democratic method proves futile. I have been supporting the cause of freedom of the media. The recent Court order asking the channel Times Now to pay Rs. 100 crore as damages for an inadvertent inaccuracy appeared to me grossly disproportionate to the offence. Further, taking note of several reports/complaints from various quarters about attacks on mediapersons and covert measures adopted to undermine press freedom fact finding teams have been set up by me to take stock of the ground realities in various areas. Letters to the Chief Ministers of Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh were sent by me and positive responses have been received showing their full support to the cause of press freedom. In the matter of proceedings initiated against mediapersons who reported that an MLA watching obscene clips on his mobile, the Assembly Speaker was urged by me to reconsider his decision taking all aspects into consideration against those MLAs who brought disgrace to the House. I am happy to say that I have, in keeping with the mandate of the Press Council, attempted to inculcate the ethos of ethics (rather than punishment) by attempting settlement between the parties or allowing the respondents to make amends for their lapses. This, I feel, is how the Council should function as I intend to make it an instrument of mediation which is, in my opinion, the democratic approach. I may add that the claim to self regulation is I feel not workable and all institutions in a democratic set up are subject to regulation by an independent statutory authority. I may add that regulation is a concept distinct from ‘control’. In control there is no freedom, whereas in regulation there is freedom but it is subject to reasonable restrictions in the public interest. For this purpose, I need the help and co-operation and advice of all mediapersons and bodies associated with the media. Further, if the Government makes the relevant amendments to the Press Council Act and Rules under it, as suggested by the Council to strengthen it and to enable it to discharge its functions more efficiently and effectively, the Council is bound to emerge as an authority to be reckoned with for its support for the freedom of the press while at the same time asking the press to act responsibly. I hope and trust the readers will find this report useful and informative as the earlier ones.

Markandey Katju Place: New Delhi Chairman Dated : 31.3.2012 Press Council of India CHAPTER – I General Review

A democracy and the media complement each other to create a better society and a progressive nation. For a proper functioning of democracy it is essential that citizens are kept informed about news from various parts of the country and the world because only then can they form rational opinions. A citizen surely cannot be expected personally to gather news to enable him or her to form such opinions. Hence, the media plays an important role in a democracy and serves as an agency of the people to gather news and information for them. It is for this reason that freedom of the press has been emphasised in all democratic countries, while it was not permitted in feudal or totalitarian regimes. Earlier, through 2010-2011, the media exposures kept the authorities on their toes while in the year 2011-2012 the biggest event was ’s anti-corruption movement. It saw the country rally in support and attracted the attention of the public and has been named among the top ten news stories in the world this year by Time magazine which listed the Arab Spring and killing of Osama Bin Laden as the top attention, grabbing headlines. Hazare’s fasts triggered mass demonstrations and wide roar amongst all Indians against corruption and heaped pressure on the government to create an independent ombudsman capable of investigating the nation’s political elites – even the Prime Minister and bringing the corrupt to justice. The Court orders directing Times Now to deposit Rs. 100 crore as a precondition for appeal in defamation case involving Justice P.B. Sawant also became a rallying point for the media, both electronic and print in the year under review. Union Minister for Communications and Information Technology ’s demands that internet intermediaries i.e. the social networking sites Google, , Yahoo and Microsoft to remove inflammatory content as well as other texts and images that might disturb peace and result in serious law and order problems also sparked off debates and protests in the world against such a move. The year also saw the setting up of a five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India, S.H. Kapadia to take up the issue of framing

1 guidelines for media to report cases in courts following complaints about misreporting of court hearings and leak of confidential information to litigants. On the international plane perhaps the single most important event of the year that evoked disgust among the British public was ’s British tabloid alleged illegal scandal. The publication owned by him was engaged in unethical practices. Its journalists were reportedly hacking into phones of people, including those of a murdered schoolgirl and soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The present chapter provides an insight into the activities of the Council during the year and the state of national as well as international press during the period under review.

Introduction The Press Council of India was set up in the year 1966 on the recommendations of the first Press Commission. In the discharge of its two-fold function of preserving the freedom of press and maintaining and improving standards of press, the Council performs a multi-faceted role. On the one hand it acts as a quasi-judicial authority with all the powers of a Civil Court and on the other, in its advisory capacity, it guides the press as well as the authorities on any matter that may have a bearing on the freedom of press and in its preservation. The Press Council is headed by a Chairman who has by convention been a sitting/retired judge of the . The Council consists of 28 other members of whom 20 represent the press, five are from the two Houses of the Parliament and three represent the cultural, literary and legal fields and are nominated by Sahitya Academy, University Grants Commission and the Bar Council of India. The Council is funded by the revenue collected by it from the fee levied on the registered newspapers of the country on the basis of their circulation, the deficit being made good by way of grant by the Central Government. Though to some extent, the Council is dependent on the government for finances, it has remained completely uninfluenced by any extraneous considerations in discharge of its quasi-judicial functions. As a quasi-judicial body, the Council is being approached by way of more and more complaints every year. This is not to say that instances of violation of ethics or that of threats to the press freedom are on the increase. In fact, the Council feels that the press as well as those holding the reins of power are by and large acting responsibly. The reason for the steady increase in the number of complaints being lodged with it is that the Council’s forum is being preferred over courts where the proceedings, by their very nature, are costly and time consuming. The Council strives to provide quick justice at the doorstep

2 and to this end, it regularly meets in different parts of the country to hear cases from that region. The complaints received by the Council broadly fall into two categories: Complaints by the Press and complaints against the Press. Any person feeling aggrieved about anything done which is likely to impair or interfere with the independence of the Press may approach the Council. Similarly, anybody aggrieved by any publication or non- publication in any newspaper or journal may lodge a complaint with the Council for breach of the recognised canons of journalistic ethics and taste. The Council is empowered to make observations in respect of the conduct of any authority including Government, if it considers it necessary, for the performance of its functions under the Act. On the other hand, if it finds that a newspaper or a news agency has offended against the standards of journalistic ethics or public taste or that an editor or a working journalist has committed any professional misconduct, it can warn, admonish or censure the newspaper, the news agency, the editor or the journalist or disapprove the conduct of the editor or the journalist. Thus, the Council has a lot of moral authority. Its decisions are final and cannot be questioned in any court of law. The decisions of the Council have generally been honoured and accepted by the media and the authorities alike. What sets the Press Council of India apart from other parallel institutions worldwide is that while it has been set up under an Act of Parliament, and notwithstanding the fact that a substantial part of its funds comes by way of grants-in-aid from the government, it has full functional autonomy and independence from governmental control in the discharge of its statutory responsibilities. Another extremely healthy feature of the Press Council of India is the fact that the Press Council of India unlike other Press Councils the world over including the British Press Complaints Commission adjudicates complaints not only against the Press but also complaints by the press against governmental and other authorities.

Working of the Council (April 1, 2011 – March 31, 2012)

Reconstitution of the Press Council of India The Press Council Act, 1978 provides for re-constitution of the Council every three years. The tenth three-year term of the Council came to an end on January 6, 2011 and with a gap of about six months the Council was re-

3 constituted for its eleventh three-year term w.e.f. June 15, 2011 vide Gazette Notification dated 15.6.2011 notifying names of 27 members. (Annexure C) The notification of remaining one member in 5(3)(b) category is awaited.

Selection of the Press Council’s Nominee to Nominate the Chairman As per the provision of the Press Council Act, 1978 the nomination of the Chairman is to be made by a Committee constituted of the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and a member from among the members of the Press Council. The Council met at New Delhi on July 15, 2011 to select a nominee of the Council on the nominating Committee for the selection of the Chairman. The Press Council members unanimously elected Mr. K.S. Sachidananda Murthy to be their nominee on the Committee for the purpose. His name was forwarded to the Chairman of Rajya Sabha as per the requirement of the rules prescribed in this behalf.

New Chairman The term of the incumbent Chairman, Mr. Justice G.N. Ray concluded on May 18, 2011. Justice Ray, however, continued to chair the Council till October 4, 2011 under the proviso to Section 6(1) of the Act when the Central Government notified the nomination of Mr. Justice Markandey Katju, former judge of the Supreme Court as Chairman for a three year term w.e.f. October 5, 2011. The Gazette Notification issued by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting in this regard can be seen at Annexure D. Starting his career as an advocate in Justice Markandey Katju was appointed as Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department and thereafter elevated to the Bench of Allahabad High Court in 1991. He was appointed Acting Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court in August 2004, Chief Justice of in November 2004 and Chief Justice of Delhi High Court in October 2005. In April 2006 he was elevated to the Supreme Court of India and superannuated on September 20, 2011. During his illustrious professional career Hon’ble Mr Justice Katju has delivered many a path breaking and unconventional judgments by which he has expressed his mind upholding the dignity of human rights. He exhibited an unflinching courage through his judicial pronouncements demarcating the boundaries of the three organs of the Indian Constitution – the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. The pronouncements of Mr. Justice M. Katju who assumed charge of the Chair on October 5, 2011 set off debates and introspection by and among the

4 media as well as the citizenry on the role expected of the media as the fourth estate in a growing democracy. Under his guidance, the Council not only gave a call to the media to recognize its strength and weaknesses and give direction to the common man through its ideas, but also strongly advised the authorities to ensure that the media was able to discharge its functions freely and fairly.

Meetings of Council and its Committees

The Council carries out its statutory obligations as set out in Section 8(1) of the Press Council Act, 1978 which says: “For the purpose of performing its functions under this Act, the Council may constitute from among its members, such Committees for general or special purposes as it may deem necessary and every Committee so constituted shall perform such functions as are assigned to it by the Council”. Pursuant to this provision, the Council not only constitutes Standing Committees but also ad-hoc Committees from time to time to facilitate the designated work. Generally all the Committees are headed by the Chairman of the Council. But at times ad-hoc Committees are constituted under convenorship of one of its members. The important Sub-Committees which were constituted and functioned during the period under review, were:- 1. Sub-Committee to examine the issue on “Private Treaties by Media Companies”.

2. Sub-Committee to examine the issue of safety of journalists in discharge of their duties.

3. Sub-Committee to examine the issue of threats/problems being faced by the Small and Medium newspapers for non-adoption of the Model Accreditation/Advertisement Rules framed by the Press Council of India. 4. Sub-Committee to consider draft Cabinet Note on “Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Amendment Bill, 2011” – Comments regarding.

5. Sub-Committee on examining the problems encountered by the press. 6. The Council mooted the proposal to institute National Awards to honour journalists excelling in their respective field and constituted a Committee for laying down criteria and modalities for the purpose.

5 Fact Finding Team 1. Fact Finding Team set up to investigate the matter of brutal murder of Shri Rai and his family members in Umaria District of . At the close of the year the report of the Fact Finding Team is awaited. 2. Fact Finding Team constituted to go into all aspects of the complaints of violation of freedom of press in . The report of this Team is expected in early next financial year. With a gap of about six months the Council which was re-constituted for its eleventh three-year term w.e.f. June 15, 2011 vide Gazette Notification dated 15.6.2011 held four sittings during the period under review. The workload of the Council has increased manifold. The two Inquiry Committees, which are Standing Committees presided over by the Chairman of the Council shoulder the largest quantum of the workload of the Council by holding inquiries in respect of the complaints received by the Council. Their proceedings are open to the public. The parties to the cases are entitled to substantiate their stand through relevant evidence, oral or documentary. They are also allowed to be represented by lawyers. The Committees at the close of inquiry, considering the records and oral submissions made before them submit their recommendations with regard to cases inquired to the Council for final decision. During the financial year, the two Inquiry Committees held 11 sittings and made their recommendations in 109 matters to the Council for final adjudication. The composition of Inquiry Committees headed by Chairman of the Council for the year under review is given below:

Inquiry Committee (I) Shri K.S. Sachidananda Murthy Shri Arvind S. Tengse Shri Kosuri Amarnath Dr. R. Lakshmipathy Shri Milan Kumar Dey Shri Harin Pathak, MP (Lok Sabha) Shri Jagjit Singh Dardi Shri Rajeev Ranjan Nag

6 Shri Sanjay Gupta Shri Vijay Kumar Chopra Shri A. Krishna Murthy Shri Rajiv Shukla, MP (Rajya Sabha) *Kumari Meenakshi Natrajan, MP (Lok Sabha)

Inquiry Committee (II) Shri Shravan Garg Shri Bishambhar Newar Shri Uppala Lakshman Shri Anil Agrawal Shri Gurinder Singh Shri Neeraj Bajpai Shri Sanjay Dina Patil, MP (Lok Sabha) Shri Sheetla Singh Shri Sondeep Shankar Shri Arun Kumar Shri V.K. Chopra Shri Kalyan Barooah Shri Rajeev Sabade Shri Prakash Javadekar, MP (Rajya Sabha) Complaints before the Council The 10th term of the Council came to an end on January 6, 2011 and thus it remained non functional for almost six months. A total of 885 complaints were instituted in the Council during the year under review. Of these, 170 complaints were by the Press against the authorities of the Government for violation of press freedom and 715 complaints were directed against the press for breach of journalistic ethics. With 1047 matters pending from the last year, there were

*Resigned on 23.1.2012

7 a total of 1932 matters for disposal by the Council. Of these 1116 matters were disposed off during the year, either by way of adjudication or through summary disposal by the Chairman on account of settlement by the mediation of the Chairman or due to lack of sufficient grounds for holding inquiries or non- pursuance, withdrawal or on account of matters having become sub-judice. Out of these, two matters were directly placed before the Council for adjudication. In all 816 matters were being processed at the close of the year. A detailed statement of the institution and disposal of the complaints is at Annexure –A.

Press & Registration Appellate Board

Section 8C of the Press & Registration of Books Act, 1867 entrusts to the Press Council of India, the Appellate Jurisdiction over the Magisterial Orders of non-authentication of a declaration under Section 6 or its subsequent cancellation under Section 8B of the said Act. The Board consists of a Chairman and another member to be nominated by the Press Council of India from among its members. At the beginning of the period under review 10 appeals alongwith a review petition were pending before the Board and six more appeals were preferred. The Board held three sittings during the year after it was constituted on July 15, 2011. Out of these 16 appeals, four were disposed off, 12 appeals are pending for consideration before the Appellate Board along with a review petition.

Opinions Expressed By Hon’ble Chairman

Mr. Justice Markandey Katju, Chairman, Press Council of India on assuming the chair also stressed that the basic task of the media is to provide truthful and objective information to the people which would enable them to form rational opinions. Pointing out that the media in the country often portrays non-issues while real issues of economic problems, poverty, un-employment, education and medical care are sidelined. While asserting that “Self-regulation is no regulation” he has reiterated the Council’s proposal that the electronic media should be brought under the Press Council renaming it Media Council invested with sufficient teeth so that it could oversee the media’s discharge of its duty as a vehicle encouraging rationale ideas. He has also stressed the duty of the authorities to ensure that the press persons are not hindered by any agency of the state in discharge of their duties. Taking note of several reports and complaints from various quarters about attacks on mediapersons and covert measures adopted to undermine press freedom fact finding teams have been set up to take stock of the ground realities in various areas.

8 Seminars and Workshops During the period under review the Press Council of India encouraged debates on media matters through various seminars/conferences/meets. National Press Day, 2011 The National Press Day, this year with discussions centered around “Media as an Instrument of Public Accountability” was inaugurated by Mr. M. Hamid Ansari, Hon’ble Vice-. Hon’ble Minister for Information and Broadcasting, Mrs. graced the occasion as Guest of Honour while Shri Rajeev Shukla, Hon’ble Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs and Member, Press Council of India and Shri Prakash Javadekar, M.P. and Member, Press Council of India were Special Guests. To mark the occasion a Souvenir carrying articles on the subject was released. The states also commemorated the day in befitting manner. Interaction with World Press Bodies The Press Council of India is also an active member of the World Association of Press Councils (WAPC). WAPC Executive Council meet was held on April 27, 2011 at New Delhi wherein WAPC member countries participated. This was followed by a two day International Colloquium on “Freedom of Expression and Human Rights” on April 28-29, 2011 in Delhi. The deliberations laid special emphasis on Freedom of Expression versus Right of the Civil Society, Media as a Defender of Human Rights, Reporting Human Rights Excesses and Promoting Peace Journalism. The Colloquium was inaugurated by Mrs. Ambika Soni, Hon’ble Minister for Information and Broadcasting and Mr. Justice G.N. Ray, the then Chairman, Press Council of India presided over the function. Media organizations from various countries like Australia, Austria, Turkey, Israel, Tanzania, Nepal, Indonesia etc. besides UN and Indian representatives deliberated on the issue from the international perspective as well as those of their respective countries. The debates and presentations were published and circulated internationally. The Council also initiated a process of consultation and dialogue with press/media Councils and similar bodies in different parts of the world for active encouragement to preservation of the press freedom and promotion of its standards and ethics worldwide. Interaction included visits to (i) Kuala Lampur, Malaysia on April 7-9, 2011 for consultation on establishment of Press Council in the country; (ii) on November 27-30, 2011 to Hong Kong; and (iii) to

9 Indonesia on December 7-8, 2011. The Council also received the representatives from Afghanistan on April 26, 2011 and South Africa on November 23, 2011. A short report on the visit of representatives of Press Freedom Commission of South Africa to India in November 2011 on research mission can be seen at Annexure F. Transparency Mechanism The Secretary of the Press Council of India is the Chief Vigilance Officer of the office. The vigilance set up of the Council, consisting of Deputy Secretary and Section Officer (Admn.) functioned under the direct supervision of the Secretary (CVO) and Chairman of the Council. It conducted regular and surprise checks to prevent/combat any corruption practices in the Secretariat. The grievance redressal mechanism is in place at the internal and external level which comprises of Director of Grievances being the Secretary, Press Council of India. The staff related grievances are attended to by the Staff Grievance Officer of the Council being the Deputy Secretary. The Citizen’s Charter of the Council containing all the necessary details of the organization is available in hard as well as soft copy for the public at the office address as well as Press Council’s website. Resignation of Member During the reviewed year Kumari Meenakshi Natarajan, MP (Lok Sabha) who was nominated as member of the Council for its 11th term under Section 5(3)(e) of the Press Council Act, 1978 vide Gazette Notification dated June 15, 2011 tendered her resignation on January 23, 2012 owing to pressing engagements. Tributes The Council mourned the demise of its two members namely, (i) Shri Bhattacharjea (April 2000 to March 2001) who passed away on April 4, 2011 and (ii) Shri Maheshwar Dayalu Gangwar (1995-1998 and 1998-2001) who passed away on January 1, 2012. Paying rich tributes to them the Council passed resolution regarding their valuable contributions to the Press Council and their dedicated and selfless service to the nation. Promotion of Official Language The Council paid particular attention to the propagation of Hindi in its official use. All of its staff members, already notified under Section 10(4) of the

10 Official Language Rules, 1976 (as amended, 1987) are encouraged to work in Hindi. Regular meetings of the Council’s Official Language Implementation Committee were conducted during every quarter. Quarterly Workshops relating to official language were organized for the benefit of its employees. To emphasise the use of Hindi, Hindi fortnight (Pakhwada) was observed in the Secretariat of the Council from 14.9.2011 to 28.9.2011. The main function of Hindi Diwas was held on 21.9.2011. Hon’ble Chairman of Press Council of India and other senior officers of the Council delivered their messages and expressed their views to promote use of Hindi in the Council. In addition, a debate was conducted on the subject “Hindi Hamari Sangini”. Mr. Justice G.N. Ray, the then Chairman of the Press Council gave away prizes and certificates to the winners/participants of the debate. Simultaneously, the employees of the Council were also given awards/certificates under ‘Protsahan Yojana’ and Hindi training scheme for their participation/contribution in encouraging the use of Hindi language in the office practices and procedures. The adjudications and other pronouncements of the Council were recorded in bilingual form and brought in public domain.

Suo-motu cognizance of the incidents of violation against mediapersons and threats to press freedom was undertaken by the Press Council of India in the following cases:

1. Suo-motu inquiry on the reported murder of Shri Jyotirmoy Dey, Investigative Journalist of Mid day, The Press Council of India came across many news reports appearing in various leading newspaper’s issues dated 12.6.2011 regarding brutal killing of Mumbai based Mid-Day’s Investigative Journalist, Shri Jyotirmoy Dey by unidentified motorcycle born assailants in Mumbai suburb. As per the news reports Shri Dey who reported extensively on crime notably Mumbai underworld had received threats after recently running a series of reports on the States Oil Mafia who burnt alive an Additional Collector near Nashik in January, 2011 and led to the murder. On perusal of the reports, the Council initiated suo-motu cognizance of the matter and requested the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Maharashtra for prompt investigation and to ensure that the media is able to discharge its functions without any threat or fear and a written confirmation was received from the Chief Minister. Report from the State Government of Maharashtra has been called for. The matter is under active consideration.

11 2. Suo-motu action with regard to brutal attack/assaualt on Mr. David Devadas, Journalist The Press Council of India came across a news item captioned “Scribe claims assault by J&K judge’s escort” published in issue dated 14.7.2011. It was reported in the news item that a journalist who has covered Kashmir for several publications and authored a book on the Valley alleged that J&K police and security guards of a High Court judge assaulted and abused him after he was accused of blocking his convoy with his car on a Srinagar street. David Devadas had written to the Supreme Court Chief Justice saying that he fears for his life as a false case had been registered against him. The Times of India tried to contact the police Chief - Shri Kuldeep Khoda and Chief Minister, Shri Omar Abdullah but they did not respond. But a senior police officer pleading anonymity told TOI that the journalist obstructed the judge’s motorcade and he directed his detention. The news item with regard to the assault to the journalists was also published in “” and “” issues dated 13.9.2011 and 14.9.2011 respectively. On perusal of the reports, the Council initiated suo-motu cognizance of the matter and requested the Hon’ble Chief Minister of J&K for personal directions to ensure that the media is able to discharge its functions without any hindrance. Report from the State Government of J&K was called for. The matter was treated as closed for non-pursuance.

3. Suo-motu action regarding beating up of media persons and stopping them from discharging their duties by the armed forces in Jammu and Kashmir The Council considered the matter appearing in The Times under the caption “Media resents curbs” on 8.7.2010 and noted that the then Hon’ble Chairman had written to the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Jammu & Kashmir on 5.10.2010 for personal intervention in the matter so that the media was able to discharge its duties without any fear or hindrance. In response to the Hon’ble Chairman’s letter the Chief Minister of Jammu & Kashmir vide his letter dated 15.7.2010 had informed that the Government of J&K was constrained to impose restrictions and curfew in some parts of the valley due to which the media persons had faced some difficulties initially but they provided the curfew passes to media persons including the hawkers and distributors as per their requirements. He further stated that some newspapers of Jammu had carried baseless and incorrect story about alleged desecration of a temple in South Kashmir. This news had the potential to hurt the religious sentiments of a

12 section of the society which could eventually lead to communal flare up. Thus the government had proceeded against these newspapers for publishing the baseless and malicious reports. The editors of the newspapers had met the authorities and gave assurance that they will be careful in future. He asserted that, he is an ardent supporter of freedom of press but it is equally necessary that the press conducts itself in a mature and responsible manner and does not distort or misreport facts. The Council took on record the assurance given by the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Jammu & Kashmir. 4. Suo-motu cognizance with regard to the attack on The Times of India building at Mumbai The Press Council of India came across some news reports appearing in various newspapers regarding attack on The Times of India building at Mumbai. It has been reported in the news items that a group of miscreants waving saffron flags and shouting pro- slogans barged into The Times of India building and vandalized the reception area before the police took charge of the situation. It has been further reported that the attackers claimed to be upset with a news report in , a Marathi morninger belonging to the Times Group of Publications. The attackers appeared angry with a report about possible defections from the Shiv Sena to NCP, a party which is an ally in the State’s ruling Democratic Front alliance. It has also been reported that the Press Council Chief Markandey Katju has condemned the attack on TOI’s Mumbai office and asked the Maharashtra Government for a report. The Secretary, Indian Newspaper Society, New Delhi vide letter dated 30.1.2012 while forwarding a clipping of the news item that appeared in Navbharat Times on 29.1.2012 has requested the Council to take action in the matter. Hon’ble Chairman, Press Council of India has addressed a letter dated 28.1.2012 to the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Maharashtra for suitable action. The Council vide its letter dated 8.2.2012 called for a report from the State Government of Maharashtra. The matter is under active consideration. Advisory Function In its advisory capacity the Council provided the government and other authorities with its views on many issues. Some of the important ones are as follows: 1. No Day Yet Named Motion under Rule 189 admitted in Lok Sabha expressing concern over vulgar programmes and news reports appearing in electronic and print media.

13 2. Reference from Ministry of Law & Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, Law Commission of India, , New Delhi regarding astrology advertisement. 3. Reference received from Chief Election Commissioner of India regarding providing of some concrete parameters to adjudge “Paid News.” — The Council decided to send the four parameters/guidelines that could be used by the Election Commission of India for performing their functions to paid news syndrome. It also decided to send these parameters to State Election Commission, Maharashtra in addition to five States of UP, Punjab, Uttrakhand, Manipur and Goa in wake of forthcoming elections. Other Matters considered by the Council Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs (Publicity Division), New Delhi vide its letter dated 22.7.2011 informed of the setting up of a group of stakeholders headed by Hon’ble Minister of State (I/C), Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution to discuss various problems faced by consumers due to “Misleading Advertisements” in media and ways and means to tackle the menace. The issue of cheating of consumers in the garb of Multi Level Marketing (MLM) schemes and the money circulation schemes shall also be discussed. Shri K.S. Sachidnanda Murthy, Member, Press Council of India has been nominated to represent the Press Council of India thereof. 2. On the proposal from Shri Jagjit Singh Dardi, Member, PCI regarding stoppage of issuance entry passes of Punjab Civil Secretariat to the Editors and journalists of Punjab on the pattern the passes of being issued to the Editors and journalists of Chandigarh and release of Punjab government advertisements, Council has taken up the matter with the government of Punjab for wider access to news for mediapersons. The Council noted and complied with the directions of the Central Information Commission dated 19.9.2011 for displaying on the Council’s website the report of its Sub-Committee on ‘Paid News Syndrome’.

State of the Press—India

Year 2011-2012 saw the country surcharged with tension created by the anti-corruption movement spearheaded by social activist Anna Hazare. In the face of this, the media and the electronic media in particular were put to strong test. The TV media coverage of the epic Anna Hazare fast with all its

14 accompanying twists and turns was a defining moment for Indian media to rethink, refurbish and reposition itself. During this period the media became the voice of people and it’s reporting on the real issues like economic, poverty, corruption etc. is a prime example of the impact the media can have on the public opinion and psyche and its role in opinion moulding. The reporting of such issues brought the media as much acclaim as criticism. The absence of self-regulation by media covering such sensitive issues led the government to mull over content regulations. The period of trials and tribulations for the press which started far back with the eruption of violence and terrorism in the country continues unabated. Even a cursory glance at the newspaper reports of the year make it abundantly clear that the year under review cannot be viewed in any positive light from the media view point. While journalists in the conflict ridden north and north- east continued to practice their profession in the line of fire, their colleagues in the rest of the country frequently faced intimidation and attacks from political parties and religious extremists. Taking strong note of Jammu and Kashmir Assembly Speaker, Mohd. Akbar Lone’s remarks claiming that the media was not at liberty to make claims without being answerable to the House and that the fourth estate was subservient to the State Assembly media persons stood up from their seats in protest and decided to boycott the proceedings of the House demanding that the Speaker ‘take back’ his words. Given below are a collection of reports that cover important developments in the Indian press during the year 2011-2012. Cyber activists, bloggers and legal experts are crying foul over the new rules and guidelines under the Information Technology Amendment Act 2008, that lay additional focus on content regulation and information security, besides dealing with cyber terrorism and data protection. They have termed it an attempt to gag free speech by giving intermediaries like Internet Service Providers, web hosting companies, search engines and cyber cafes the right to control content. The new rules require hosts or owners of websites to take action against “objectionable content” that is considered “disparaging”, “harassing”, “blasphemous” or “hateful”. Also included is anything that “threatens the unity, integrity, defence, security or sovereignty of India, friendly relations with foreign countries, or public order”. And if an intermediary fails to act on a complaint within 36 hours of receiving it, the firm’s top management is liable to face civil or criminal proceedings that could involve huge penalties and even imprisonment. Denying any move to restrict free speech, the government claims “canards”

15 are being spread by “vested interests” that thrive on misuse of the Internet. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated May 11, 2011) In a bid to keep a check on TV channels owned by political parties, the Chief Election Commissioner, Mr S.Y. Quraishi said the Election Commission is working on guidelines for the electronic media to ensure a level playing field to all. Admitting that political parties-owned TV channels might misuse them for political gains, Mr. Quraishi said, “We are also examining how to account for whether you are using your own channel for unlimited publicity. We are examining it. Before the next elections, we will have some policy in place”. Mr. Quraishi pointed out that in some of the states that went to polls, most of the channels are owned by political parties. He said these channels would change the complexion as they do not have to buy space on other channels. The EC admitted that it is a very complicated issue and it is making all its efforts to evolve guidelines so as to keep check on misuse of visual media. “We are considering it and some guidelines are being evolved. We don’t want to do anything in a haste,” said the Election Commissioner, Mr. V.S. Sampath. Mr. Quraishi also laid stress on self-regulation by media and political parties on paid news. “Definition and identification of paid news needs to be concrete,” he added. (, New Delhi dated May 12, 2011) The Centre has set up a Broadcasting Content Complaint Council (BCCC) to look into the grievances of television viewers. The 13-member Council, to be headed by former Delhi High Court Justice A.P. Shah, will began functioning from the first week of June. The Council will deal with the complaints relating to contents telecast by non-news channels, which include general entertainment, current affairs, children’s and special programmes. A self-regulatory guideline along with grievance redressal mechanism through the BCCC, formulated by Indian Broadcasting Federation (IBF) for the non-news channels, will also come into effect together with the Council. The complaint redressal mechanism will be a two-tier process, providing a viewer to lodge his or her complaint first to the broadcaster/channel. The complaint, however, should be lodged within one week of the telecast of the offending programme. Under the IBF guidelines, broadcaster will have to set up a special cell with a content auditor as its head to deal with complaints received from viewers or any other body. The content auditor will be responsible for replying to the complaint with a copy to the BCCC within a week of the complaint filed. In case the viewer receives unsatisfactory response from the broadcaster’s side the complainant can approach the BCCC directly. The Council will then take cognizance of the matter and if the broadcaster is found guilty, it will take necessary steps including issue of warning. The Council can also ask broadcaster to run an apology on the channel or recommend suspension of license of the broadcaster. “Grievances

16 have to be addressed within three weeks, the Ministry official said. In case, the BCCC’s directives remain unheard by the broadcasters, the complaint could also be forwarded to Inter Ministerial Council for suitable action and recommendation, the official added. The 13 member Council will include four members of IBF, four eminent citizens from civil society besides members from National Commission for Women, National Commission for Protection of Child Rights and National Commission for Scheduled Castes as its permanent members. Statutory bodies like National Human Rights Commission and National Commission for Scheduled Tribes will also be the members of the Committee as per the nature of complaints. (, Bangalore dated May 28, 2011) The Law Ministry is working on a proposal to make right to privacy a fundamental right in the Indian Constitution. Corporate lobbyist Nira Radia’s phone tapping row and new-age surveillance techniques being extensively used to crack down on economic offences are the trigger behind the move. “We are working on making right to privacy a fundamental right. It is likely to be tabled in the monsoon session of Parliament. However, it’s difficult to commit a time frame,” Law Minister, said. The right to privacy would include the right to confidentiality of communication, confidentiality of private or family life, protection of his honour and good name, protection from search, detention or exposure of lawful communication between individuals, privacy from surveillance, confidentiality of banking, financial, medical and legal information, protection from identity theft of various kinds, protection of use of a person’s photographs, fingerprints, DNA samples and other samples taken at police stations and other places and protection of data relating to individual. If the legislation is passed, it would address several concerns expressed by some sections of the civil society. For instance, there has been outrage over the ‘compromise’ of an individual’s privacy in a project like UID, where all personal data will be available at the click of a mouse. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated June 4, 2011) The Union Government’s move to draft a law to protect journalists could come as a respite for Maharashtra, where political parties are divided on the need for such legislation. Already there were differences in the State Cabinet on whether such a law was necessary, with both Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) and Congress Ministers expressing reservations. There is a feeling that a specific law seeking to make an offence against journalists a non-bailable offence would open the floodgates for groups such as filmmakers or teachers to demand the same. In addition, the government feels the need for a redress

17 mechanism to enquire into complaints against journalists. A Cabinet Sub- Committee will look into an enabling provision and amend the existing draft State law accordingly, which will then be presented in the next session of the Legislature. The draft ordinance, “Maharashtra Journalists (Prevention of Violence and Damage to Property) Ordinance 2010, was prepared during the tenure of . It notes the increasing attacks on journalists, causing damage to newspaper and electronic media establishments and recognizes the need to prohibit such violent activities and attacks by making the offences cognizable and non-bailable. The draft prohibits any act of violence against newspaper employees, journalists or damage to property in the newspaper and electronic media establishments. Offenders shall be punished with imprisonment for a period which may extend to three years and with fines, which may extend to Rs. 50,000. In addition, the offenders shall be liable to pay a penalty of twice the amount of the purchase price of the damaged equipment and loss caused to the property, as determined by courts.If the offender has not paid the fine then it shall be recovered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, as if it were arrears of land revenue dues. However, the main obstacle is that the draft ordinance does not have any provision for complaints to be filed against erring journalists. Some of the journalists involved with the drafting had suggested introducing a code of conduct for journalists as well as a redressal mechanism. “A deterrent” Senior journalist Jatin Desai said the proposed law was meant to be a deterrent. The question is whether a new law will make a difference without political will. From 1991, there were 1,750 cases of attacks on journalists in Maharashtra and not a single conviction. More than 85 per cent of the cases were withdrawn under pressure, he claimed. Maharashtra Chief Minister, also spoke of a State body on the lines of the Press Council of India where complaints, if any, could be filed against the media. The former Supreme Court Judge and former Chairman of the Press Council of India, P.B. Sawant, told The Hindu on the phone that the proposal for a Maharashtra-level body was buried many years ago. The former Chief Minister, , had proposed a Maharashtra Press Council, but Justice Sawant said that since there was already a national body, the plan was shelved. Justice Sawant also questioned the need for a separate law for journalists. He said the provisions of the draft were aimed at making the offences cognizable and non-bailable and increasing the fine. He said a law specifically for journalists would be discriminatory and could be challenged. “All that needs to be done is to amend the Indian Penal Code and make these provisions applicable to everybody.” He said he did not see any justification for a separate law and in any case it was

18 not going to prevent attacks on journalists. He agreed that journalists should be protected but that protection should extend to everybody. In Maharashtra, for instance, Right to Information activists were being killed. “I feel there is no justification to treat journalists as a special community,” he said. “This year, there have been 14 instances of attacks on journalists all over the country and two deaths, including that of J. Dey. The need for journalists to be protected against attacks is undeniable.” How far a special law will go in protecting the media or preventing attacks needs to be debated thoroughly. Even the journalist community has been pushing for this law without much debate and thinking. While most feel it will be a deterrent against attacks, the fact is that unless cases are fast-tracked and there is some closure, it will be just another legal provision without any meaning. With a view of expanding the media, broadcasting and entertainment sector in the country, the government has constituted a 33-member working group to evolve a strategy and propose a roadmap to expand the sector during the 12th Five Year Plan. The group, constituted by the Planning Commission, will make recommendations for policy framework in media, broadcasting and entertainment sectors. The terms of reference of the working group state that it has been constituted “to evolve an approach for formulation of plans and programmes for the I&B sector during the 12th plan period, keeping in view the emerging trends in radio, television, films, non-electronic media and IT enabled media applications.” The working group has been directed to submit its report by August 31 this year. The group has also been mandated to recommend a policy framework for streamlining and restructuring of public sector broadcasting services in the country and a policy for moving towards digital transmission from the current analogue system. It is also expected to recommend a policy for expansion of community radio and FM radio stations, which the government feels can help in reaching out to the inaccessible parts of the country. “The group will evolve appropriate strategies for disseminating information across the country, particularly in rural and remote areas with special focus on the flagship programmes of the government,” the directive reads. It will devise policies and strategies for optimally using India’s power in the film and broadcasting sectors. (, New Delhi dated June 30, 2011) Other than creating a flutter, the recent Mahendra Singh Dhoni- advertisement spoof has put the spotlight on how liquor brands are violating existing norms by promoting their products through surrogate advertisements on TV. “The McDowell’s and Royal Stag whisky ads featuring well-known cricketers, and all other similar ads are in gross violation in existing norms. The Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Ministry never approved their telecast”. All content telecast on television channels, through cable networks,

19 have to adhere to the ‘programme and advertising code’ in the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act. “As per the code, no surrogate ads or ads of brand extensions of liquor brands are allowed,” said the I&B Ministry official. He admitted, however, that the surrogate ads issue is a grey area. “We are in the process of streamlining this complex issue of surrogate ads and are finalising a set of guidelines,” the official said. After the recent controversy over the Dhoni- Harbhajan liquor ad, the I&B Ministry has sent a reminder to the bodies framing the guidelines to speed up the work. HT had reported earlier that the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) and the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) is preparing a set of guidelines for advertisements. In 2010, the government had declared a blanket ban (no-exception) on all liquor advertisements. (The , New Delhi dated July 27, 2011) The government is preparing to bring in a regulatory mechanism to check a growing number of advertisements in the media that contain misleading information and erroneous claims. Sources said the Prime Minister’s Office had instructed the Consumer Affairs Department to prepare the modalities of creating such a regulatory mechanism. The department has been asked to submit its first draft to the PMO within a month. They said the government was keen to ensure that this regulatory framework was created within the next one year. The matter has been under consideration of the Consumer Affairs Department for some time now. The push for a regulatory mechanism came at a review meeting taken in the PMO on the performance of the Consumer Affairs Department along with other related Ministries and Departments like Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Food and Public Distribution, and Food Processing. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated September 17, 2011) The Union government’s draft ‘Framework and Guidelines for Use of Social Media for Government Organisations,’ released earlier this month, is a significant step towards consolidating these efforts by laying down guidelines on how government agencies can use this tool to “reach out to this audience at a key stroke.” The policy states that government departments can use this new medium not only to disseminate information but also to undertake public engagement in policymaking and to get feedback on delivery of services. The 40-page document lays down a comprehensive framework dealing with aspects, both legal and structural. On resource allocation, it recommends that government agencies appoint a dedicated team trained and equipped to deal with this new medium. The document, which lists the best practices in several countries and the existing initiatives in government departments, identifies social networking sites,

20 blogs, video-sharing sites, micro-blogs and wikis as the main platforms to be used. It also encourages creating own and independent platforms to do so. The guidelines are also fairly detailed on topics such as information disclosure, etiquette and infringement of intellectual property rights. Data handling On data handling, the draft mandates that records and trails of any information sharing be captured and recorded. It recommends that “privileged access may be mandated by the government along the same lines as ‘take- down notices’ and ‘information requests’ currently being sent to social media and other platforms for intellectual property rights infringement and other offences”. Policies for security For this, it states that specific policies can be drafted for information security and archiving. This could include “service-level agreements” between the government and the service provider for content storage, shared access and archival, and setting a response time for removal of offensive content as short as five minutes and as long as 15 minutes. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated September 19, 2011) The government on November 17, 2011 expressed concern over misleading advertisements and suggested that peer-run Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) create a more responsive system to check them. I&B Minister, Ambika Soni asked ASCI to reduce the time lag between the date of complaints received and action taken by ASCI and to facilitate a quick corrective mechanism. Food and Consumer Affairs Minister, K.V. Thomas said the government was mulling an Inter Ministerial Committee to strengthen laws and regulations to prevent misleading ads. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated November 18, 2011) The government has come out with new rules to show tobacco use on the big screen and in television which have significantly toned down the original notification completely prohibiting tobacco and its use in films and TV programmes. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare notified the rules for cigarettes and other tobacco products on 14th November. They were revised on 27th November after consultations and taking into account the views of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to make it more practical and implementable. The new notification allows smoking scenes and use of tobacco products with certain riders like scrolls at the beginning and middle of the film. However, the film fraternity is not happy about the new rules. The Health Ministry has filed an

21 affidavit in the Supreme Court in support of the new notification so that it cannot be challenged in other High Courts. According to the new rules all movies and TV programmes produced before 14th November displaying tobacco products or tobacco products’ use shall have to mandatorily display:

*Anti-tobacco health spots or messages of minimum 30 seconds duration each at the beginning and middle of the film or the television programme and

*Anti tobacco health warning as a prominent scroll at the bottom of the screen during the period of such display.

Such programmes will be telecast at timings that are likely to have least viewership of minors. For new films and TV programmes a strong editorial justification for display of tobacco products or their use shall be given to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) along with UA certification, and it will be accompanied by: a disclaimer of minimum 20 seconds duration by the concerned actor regarding the ill effects of the use of such products, in the beginning and middle of the film or television programme.

Anti-tobacco health spots or messages of minimum 30 seconds duration each at the beginning and middle of the film or the television programme; Anti- tobacco health warning as a prominent scroll at the bottom of the screen during the period of such display; there will be a representative from the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in the Central Board of Film Certification. (The Statesman, New Delhi dated November 29, 2011)

Parliament on December 19, 2011 passed the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2011 after the Rajya Sabha adopted it through voice vote. Winding up the discussion on the bill, Information and Broadcasting Minister, Ambika Soni said the measure aims at regulating cable operators and digitalising the analogue TV network across the country in a phased manner by December 31, 2014. She said the legislation will end the fight for more TRPs among channels to gain more advertisements. The bill also gives the government the right to cancel licences of cable operators who flout rules. “TRP is a bane of the TV programmes as it leads to showing of obscene materials and superstition. The bill will address this issue”, the Minister said. She said the legislation has provisions for effective monitoring of contents of the programmes aired through designated officers. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated December 20, 2011)

The Union Government on December 19, 2011 said it was in the process of revising the government advertisement rates for newspapers. “In the last two-and-half years, the rates have been revised twice. The Rate Structure

22 Committee is in the process of finalizing the latest rates”, Minister for Information and Broadcasting, Ambika Soni said while replying to a question during question hour in the Rajya Sabha. “The rates of publication of advertisements, given out by the DAVP, are reviewed at regular intervals. In addition to that, as a special measure, the commission, which used to be charged by the DAVP has not been charged in order to enhance the rates being charged by the newspapers”, she said. The Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity (DAVP) is the nodal multi-media advertising agency of the government. Ms. Soni also informed the House that as many as 205 applications for empanelment from newspapers and journals were accepted till July 31 of current fiscal. So far in 2011-12, a total of 704 applications were received for empanelment. In 2010-11, 788 applications were approved against a request of 1, 689. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated December 20, 2011)

Union Information and Broadcasting Minister, Ms. Ambika Soni on December 20, 2011 said that measures being taken by the government in connection with the news industry is benefiting the domestic news media. Answering a query in the Lok Sabha, Ms. Ambika Soni said that according to the print media policy, foreign newspapers dealing with news and current affairs were not being allowed to bring out Indian editions though a foreign publishing house which owns a foreign newspaper has been allowed to bring out the facsimile edition of the foreign newspaper through its wholly-owned Indian subsidiary. She said, “Although the facsimile editions of foreign newspapers are allowed, they are not allowed to carry advertisements in any form aimed at Indian subscribers”. Measures such as this and the move to limit the FDI in the print media have been of immense benefit to the domestic news industry. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated December 21, 2011)

Assembly Speaker K.G Bopaiah on February 15, 2012 said it was for the State government to decide whether or not to follow the Lok Sabha model for television coverage of House proceedings, footages of which are shared with private television channels by the State owned Doordarshan.

“Four years ago, the Lok Sabha Secretariat issued guidelines on the telecast of the proceedings in the legislature. It is for the government to decide whether they will follow it. Embarrassed by the porngate episode in the Assembly, the government had dropped hints that it was contemplating a ban on live telecast of the legislature proceedings by private television channels. Bopaiah said a Legislative Committee, which went into the details of the State having its own telecasting system to cover the proceedings of the Assembly and the Council, had said that it would cost the State exchequer Rs. 25 crore to put the system in place. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated February 16, 2012)

23 The Broadcast Content Complaints Council (BCCC) has asked television channels to dilute scenes portraying assault, abuse, and com-modification of women and children in their programmes. “We have marked a ‘Lakshman Rekha’ (line of tolerance) for TV channels that have been airing serials portraying atrocities against and mistreatment of women and children. They have been asked to dilute such objectionable scenes”, said Justice A.P. Shah, Chairman, BCCC who has already issued an advisory to the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) to this effect. The BCCC is empowered to initiate suo-motu proceedings against any programme on any TV channel. There have been about 400 complaints against TV channels for airing objectionable content. “Of these, about 20 relate to offensive portrayal of women and children”, Shah said. (The Hindustan Times, New Delhi dated February 18, 2012) Industry representatives, including broadcasters and advertisers, have announced setting up of Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC), which will measure TV audience ratings and to that extent, break the monopoly of TAM. This will be the first time that media industry representatives will be part of the audience rating body and its equity will be held by the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF), Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA) and Advertising Agencies Association of India (AAAI) with a 60%, 20% and 20% stake respectively. BARC was a key recommendation of the Amit Mitra Committee of TV audience measurement set up by the I&B Ministry. A 10-member BARC Board will soon be announced. At present, TV audience is measured by private firm TAM. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated March 16, 2012)

Attacks

Attacks on journalists are getting worrying more frequent. Attempts at browbeating the fearless reporters have been many during the year. Taking note of several reports and complaints from various quarters about these attacks and covert measures adopted to undermine press freedom the Council has set up fact finding teams to take stock of the ground realities in various areas. In this connection letters have also been addressed by Chairman, Press Council of India to Chief Ministers of respective States. Given below are a collection of reports that cover the major incidents of attacks/assaults on media persons during the period under review. Extensive reporting of the incidents can also be perused in the Council’s in house journals namely, PCI Reviews for the said financial year.

24 • Murder of Senior Crime Reporter Jyotirmoy Dey* Mr. Jyotirmoy Dey, editor (investigation) of Mumbai evening tabloid Mid- Day, was shot dead by four gunmen near Spectra Building, at on June 11, 2011 afternoon. Dey was the first reporter to expose the Rs. 8,000 crore oil mafia racket in the State. According to his colleagues in Mid-Day, J. Dey had been fair and non-controversial. Neither had he reported a threat from any quarter of the underworld with which he was quite familiar. He was not working on any specific story in the last two weeks, his colleagues said. Agency reports, meanwhile, quoted un-named police sources as saying Dey, who recently ran a series of news reports on the oil mafia, had received threats from anti-social elements. Joint Commissioner, Mr.Rajnish Seth (law and order) said five bullets hit the journalist in the chest, head and abdomen. He was critical when taken to hospital but succumbed to his wounds immediately. Expressing shock over the killing, Maharashtra PWD Minister, Mr. said the journalist did not target any gang or mafia in particular. Asked if the killing could be linked to elements from the underworld or the oil mafia, Mr. Bhujbal, also former Home Minister, said: “Dey was a very honest person. He used to write on the underworld. He was not targeting anyone in particular, whether any gang or any (oil) mafia”. He said Dey’s killing appeared to be pre-planned. “Some mafia will be behind it,” he said. Home Minister, Mr. R.R. Patil said the police were yet to ascertain who were behind the gruesome killing. But he expects police to track down the assailants in two-three days. Mr. Patil said police have been told to provide protection to any journalist who has asked for it. Dey had worked with several major newspapers, including Indian Express and The Hindustan Times. In Kolkata, West Bengal Chief Minister, Miss Mamata Banerjee condemned the killing of Dey, saying that such an act would not be able to stifle the voice of the media. (The Statesman, New Delhi dated June 12, 2011) The Editors Guild of India, the Broadcast Editors’ Association, the Press Club of India, and a host of other press organisations strongly condemned Dey’s killing, mourned his death, and demanded urgent action to bring the guilty to

*This incident has also been covered under the head “Court Cases”.

25 justice. Condemning Dey’s murder, the Information and Broadcasting Minister, Mrs. Ambika Soni said: “This act has challenged the freedom of press and the perusal of objective reporting. This incident is a sign of insanity perpetuated by mindless individuals in which innocent citizens are killed. No civilised society can tolerate this kind of attack on freedom of press.” Mrs. Soni also hoped that the “Home Minister of Maharashtra (Mr. R.R. Patil) will live up to his assurance of tracking down the assailants in the shortest possible time.” Maharashtra is ruled by the Congress-led government involving the -led NCP. Condemning the incident, the Prime Minister, Dr. ’s media advisor, Mr. Harish Khare described it as “shocking and unacceptable.” (The Sunday Statesman, New Delhi dated June 12, 2011)

• Attack on TOI’s Mumbai office A group of miscreants waving saffron flags and shouting pro-Shiv Sena slogans barged into The Times of India building on January 28, 2012 and vandalized the reception area before the police took charge of the situation. The attackers claimed to be upset with a news report in Maharashtra Times, a Marathi morninger belonging to The Times Group of Publications. The mob broke furniture in the lobby, smashed pots, window panes and computers, and also burnt copies of Maharashtra Times. The attackers appeared angry with a Maharashtra Times report about possible defections from the Shiv Sena to the NCP, a party which is an ally in State’s Maharashtra’s ruling Democratic Front (DF) alliance. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated January 29, 2012) Political parties have condemned January 28, 2012 attack when a mob of miscreants carrying Shiv Sena flags and shouting party slogans went on a rampage in the Times of India building. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated January 29, 2012) Twenty eight persons, suspected to be Shiv Sena members, have been arrested for vandalising the reception area of “Times of India”(TOI) building in south Mumbai on January 28, 2012, police said on January 28, 2012. The accused were booked under the relevant Sections of IPC including Section 447(Punishment for criminal trespass), Section 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), Section 452 (House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint), Section 144 (Joining unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapon), 146 (Rioting) and Sections of Criminal Amendment Act

26 as well as Mumbai Police Act in Azad Maidan police station. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated January 30, 2012) The Azad Maidan police arrested three more people on January 30, 2012 in connection with the attack on The Times of India building on January 28, 2012 afternoon. In all, 30 people have been arrested since January 28, 2012 and the police are looking to nab more than 100 others involved in the attack. The accused have been charged for rioting, vandalism and criminal trespass under several Sections of IPC. The court had rejected their bail applications and they have been remanded to police custody till February 1, 2012. Police sources said none of the rioters were from Shiv Sena. Instead, all the men belonged to the Cooperative Banking Union, headed by Sena MLA Anandrao Adsul. “They are Bank employees working in different cooperative Banks. They were irked after reading reports alleging Adsul was planning to defect to NCP”, said Inspector, A. Thube of Azad Maidan police station. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated January 31, 2012) Maharashtra Chief Minister, Prithiviraj Chavan has in a letter to the PCI assured the safety of journalists in the State. The letter to PCI Chief, Justice Markandey Katju comes after the PCI Chief sent him a scathing missive over violent attacks on journalists in Maharashtra. A statement issued on March 3, 2012 by the PCI said that the Maharashtra Chief Minister had written “stating that he (Chavan) holds the Press Council in high esteem and that his government is committed to guarantee the freedom of the press”. “He has also stated that he is getting the issues raised in my letter (regarding attacks on journalists in Maharashtra) examined and will revert to me soon with factual details”, the statement said. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated March 3, 2012)

• Murder of Madhya Pradesh Senior Journalist Chandrika Rai and his family members The brutal murder of a senior journalist and his entire family on February 18, 2012 night in Madhya Pradesh’s Umaria district, over 450 km from Bhopal, has sent shockwaves across the State with fingers being pointed at the illegal coal mining mafia active in the region. Journalist Chandrika Rai, his wife Durga and their two teenage children – son Jalaj and daughter Nisha– were murdered using a sharp object at their residence, police said. The bodies were found in four separate rooms. Mr. Rai was a freelance journalist who contributed regularly to the Hindi daily Navbharat and English daily . He had been writing consistently against the illegal coal mining in the region. He had written a series of articles alleging involvement of a local BJP leader in illegal mining. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated February 20, 2012)

27 A day after a local journalist and his family members were found allegedly murdered in his house, the Madhya Pradesh government on February 19, 2012 announced a Special Task Force-level probe into the incident. (The Hindustan Times, New Delhi dated February 20, 2012)

The Editors Guild of India has demanded that the Madhya Pradesh government institute a high-level probe into February 18, 2012 murder of senior freelance journalist Chandrika Rai and his entire family in order to “unravel the conspiracy behind the murder”. In a letter to Chief Minister, , the Guild said it was suspected that the multiple murders were a bid to silence Mr. Rai, who had recently written a series of hard-hitting articles against illegal coal mining activity in the region and the alleged involvement of a local political leader. “We owe it to the memory of this courageous journalist to ensure that the guilty are arrested speedily”, said the letter. The South Asia Media Commission also issued a statement condemning the murders and the nexus between mafia, politicians and bureaucrats that endangers journalists in many parts of the country. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated February 21, 2012) The Madhya Pradesh Director General of Police, S.K. Raut on February 23, 2012 confirmed that the Umeria journalist Chandrika Rai, who was found murdered along with his wife and two children last week, was involved in the abduction of a seven year old son of a government official. Saying that the multiple murder case was solved, Raut said, “Our investigations reveal that Chandrika Rai was involved in the abduction of the child. Those we have detained for interrogation in connection with the journalist’s murder have confessed to the kidnapping”. The police said the murders were linked to the hefty ransom money taken for the release of the abducted boy Anant Jhariya, son of PWD Sub-Divisional Officer, Hemant Jhariya. Rai was murdered because the boy’s abductors had doubts about the exact amount of ransom money cornered for the boy’s release, and its sharing led to the massacre at Rai’s home. Meanwhile, a three-member fact finding team was constituted by Press Council Chief, Justice Markandey Katju to inquire into the murder. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated February 24, 2012)

The Madhya Pradesh police on March 1, 2012 claimed to have cracked the murder case of journalist Chandrika Rai and his family members by arresting the 31 year old driver employed with the scribe. The Special Task Force (STF) which was entrusted with the investigations also sought to shoot down its earlier claim that that the scribe was killed by a gang of kidnappers whom he was blackmailing. “Right now, we are in a position to say that the killings have nothing to do with any kidnapping”, they said. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated March 2, 2012)

28 • Karnataka Porn Scandal Even before it could take a decision on summoning the three former Ministers found watching pornographic video clippings on a mobile phone, the Legislative Assembly Committee— constituted by Speaker, K.G. Bopaiah to probe the episode has begun the process of grilling representatives of television channels for telecasting the damning footage. The editor of a Channel, who appeared before the Committee on February 29, 2012, was asked questions that seemed to suggest that the media was wrong in telecasting the episode. “Don’t you know that what you had done is a violation of Rules 6, 17 and 20 of the Karnataka Vidhana Soudha Press Gallery Rules?” was one of the 15 questions posed to the editor. Five of the 15 questions were part of a dossier circulated among the four ruling party legislators in the seven-member panel. The Congress and the JD(S) have boycotted the Committee. The other 10 questions were asked spontaneously. Another senior journalist from a Kannada television channel has been summoned to appear before the Committee on March 1, 2012. A member of the panel confirmed to The Hindu that the panel had summoned representatives of another regional television channel on March 1, 2012, where the same set of queries is expected to be posed. The former Ministers, Laxman Savadi, C.C. Patil and J. Krishna Palemar, had to resign from the BJP government after television channels exposed them watching pornographic video clippings during the Assembly session on February 7. Meanwhile, Shrishailappa Bidarur, who heads the Assembly Committee, told press persons that the panel, which had received replies from the three Ministers to the show-cause served on them, would take a decision on March 1, 2012 whether to summon them before the panel. The Committee would submit report by March 13, the deadline set by the Speaker, he said. Apart from Mr. Bidarur, the panel comprises BJP MLAs S.R. Vishwanath, Nehru Olekar and Suresh Gowda. H.C. Mahadevappa and Amare Gowda Bayyapur of the Congress and Dinakar Shetty of the JD(S) have boycotted the panel. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated March 1, 2012) Defending journalists who reported the porn-gate scandal, Press Council Chairman, Justice Markandey Katju wrote to the Karnataka Assembly Speaker urging him that proceedings initiated against media persons be dropped. In his letter to Speaker, K.G. Bopaiah, he requested him to reconsider his decision and withdraw the proceedings against mediapersons and instead “take strong action

29 against the MLAs who have brought disgrace to the House”. Mr. Justice Katju said that he felt that such proceedings against mediapersons jeopardise the freedom of the media guaranteed as a fundamental right by the Constitution of India and seek to create an impression that it is the media which has brought the House into disrepute rather than the MLAs involved. He said the Inquiry Committee set up by the Karnataka Assembly in the matter should seek details of this “sordid affair” , though from the questions they had asked it seemed they were treating journalists like those accused in an offence. “In my respectful opinion the Inquiry Committee can certainly ask mediapersons concerned questions to ascertain correct facts about this sordid affair. But from what I could gather, the question being asked give the impression that the mediapersons are being treated as an accused of some offence, and are being grilled accordingly”, Mr. Katju noted. He said as people are the masters and the legislators only their representatives, the public has the right to be informed of the activities of the legislators. “And the media is an agency of the people to give them this information. Hence I do not see what wrong the media has done by telecasting the watching of porn by the MLAs in the House. “To my mind the media were only doing their duty to the people of informing them of the shameful manner in which some of their representatives were behaving”, Mr. Katju said. He said all proceedings in a Assembly must be freely telecast and reported so that the people, who are the supreme authority in a democracy, know how their representatives are behaving. “There may, of course, be exceptional situations where this cannot be done. For example, in the Second World War many secret sessions of the House of Commons were held so that Nazi spies may not know the views of the British political leaders. “But such secrecy can only be in exceptional situations. I fail to see what was the exceptional situations in Karanataka which could justify prohibiting mediapersons to report events in the House” Katju said. He also quoted the US Supreme Court judgement in Pentagon Papers case which said, “only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell”. “In my view far from deserving condemnation for their courageous reporting, , The Washington Post, and other newspapers deserve to be commended for serving the purpose which the Founding Father saw so clearly. In revealing the workings of the government which led to the Vietnam

30 War the newspapers nobly did precisely that which the Founders hoped and trusted they would do”, he said quoting the judgement. (The Statesman, New Delhi dated March 13, 2012) Legislative Assembly Speaker, K.G. Bopaiah has said that he was yet to receive the letter written by Press Council of India Chairperson, Markandey Katju urging the withdrawal of probe against mediapersons who reported on the porngate scandal. When contacted by Deccan Herald, Bopaiah on March 13, 2012 said even his office had not received the letter. Asked whether he would consider the suggestion of Katju, the Speaker said, “I can react only after going through the letter”. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated March 14, 2012) The Legislative Assembly Committee probing the porngate scandal has decided not to issue notices to eight other MLAs who allegedly watched sleazy videos inside the House. Disclosing this to reporters on March 15, 2012 Committee Chairperson, Srishailappa Bidarur said the panel had been asked to probe the incident involving only the three former ministers – Lakshman Savadi, C.C. Patil and Krishna Palemar. It is beyond the scope of the Committee to find out whether other MLAs also watched porn clips, he said. BJP MLA, Nehru Olekar, one of the Committee members, had recently alleged that eight other legislators had watched porn videos, and notices would be issued to them. He, however, did not reveal the names of the legislators. Asked about Olekar’s statement, Bidarur said that while watching the CCTV footages of the House, the Committee found many MLAs using mobile phones. “But the terms of reference say the Committee should probe only the three former ministers”, he added. On Press Council Chairman, Markandey Katju’s recent letter urging the State Legislature to drop proceedings against mediapersons in the porngate episode, he said he had not received any letter. Bidarur said the Committee would submit its report before March 20. “Do Not Indict Media” The Law Department officials are learnt to have informed the Committee that the media cannot be indicted in the porngate scandal as they have only done their duty. The media, especially TV news channels, were well within their rights to telecast what some members were doing in the House, the officials are learnt to have said. The Committee had recently grilled representatives of two private news channels for exposing the three former ministers watching porn clips in the House. The Committee, at its meeting on March 15, 2012, consulted the Law

31 Department officials on various aspects of the scandal. It is scheduled to hold another meeting on March 16, 2012 before submitting its final report. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated March 16, 2012)

Legislative Assembly Speaker, K.G. Bopaiah on March 15, 2012 expressed displeasure over the public statements of Srishailappa Bidarur, Chairman of the House Committee probing the porngate episode, and panel member Nehru Olekar. Addressing the media in Bangalore, he said a House Committee should probe and submit the report to the Speaker, after which it will be tabled in the House. “This has been the practice. Disclosing the details of the probe before submission of the report is inappropriate. It is not a good convention”, he said. Bopaiah also said the terms of reference for the Committee was to only probe the issue related to the three former ministers, Lakshman Savadi, C.C. Patil and Krishna Palemar. “Despite the order clearly stating the scope of the probe, Olekar has said that eight to 10 MLAs have watched porn clips inside the House”. This is not correct. However, I don’t want to drag the issue, he said.

The Speaker reiterated that the trio will not be allowed to participate in the proceedings till the report is tabled in the House. “I won’t take any action based on the report. I will leave it to the House to decide on an appropriate action. If need be, let there be a vote on the issue. Let people know who is siding with the porngate ministers and who is opposing them”, he said, adding that the report will be submitted on March 20. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated March 16,2012)

“The minister was reading a government order even as a porn clip played out on his mobile phone. And he had no intention of watching porn”. This was an observation of a BJP panel in its report which indicted former Minister Laxman Savadi, accused of viewing a porn clip during proceedings in the state legislative assembly on February 7. The report was tabled in the House on March 30, 2012. The 28-page report (excluding annexures) prepared by a panel headed by BJP MLA Srishailappa V. Bidarur concluded while there’s prima facie evidence that Savadi had watched sleazy clips on a mobile but not enough to recommend harsh punishment.

“As Savadi has already apologized to the Committee for using a mobile inside the House and the trio faced suspension from the assembly proceedings in the last one-and-a-half months as punishment, the Speaker may warn him not to resort to such things in future and admonish him”, it said.

32 However, two other former Ministers— C.C. Patil and Krishna Palemar —accused of watching and sharing the porn clip with Savadi were let off. “There is no evidence to suggest that former Minister C.C. Patil viewed porn on the mobile and Krishna Palemar was responsible for providing it”, the report said. It noted there were some similarities in the visuals viewed on the mobile by Savadi and the clip in a pen drive with him. However, it said, when the mobile was on, the member was also reading a government order and their watching the sleazy clip was not intentional. To ensure such incidents don’t recur, the report recommended banning of mobiles in the House. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated March 31, 2012) • Journalists Attacked in Karnataka Court Lawyers on March 2, 2012 clashed with mediapersons at a Bangalore court which was hearing the CBI’s request for the custody of former Karnataka Minister, G. Janardhan Reddy in an illegal mining case. Several people on both sides were injured and media vans damaged. The clashes started soon after Reddy was taken away from the court when the lawyers refused to let the mediapersons inside the to interview advocates involved with Reddy’s case. The lawyers threw stones; the journalists retaliated but, out-numbered, were chased into the Government Arts and Science College next door and several were beaten up. When the police intervened, the lawyers on the upper floors of the court threw down chairs and benches on them, injuring several, including Deputy Commissioner of Police, G. Ramesh, who was in charge of security at the court. Some TV channels later reported that a policeman named Chandrappa had died of injuries but Bangalore Police Chief, Jyothi Prakash Mirji refuted the claim. Though the immediate spark to March 2, 2012 violence was the lawyers’ refusal to let the journalists enter the court, tension between the two sides had been simmering since January, when the media strongly criticised the lawyers’ snap strike in Bangalore over the beating of one of them by the police for a traffic violation. In fact, even during that strike, which had crippled traffic, leaving even ambulances stranded, lawyers had attacked journalists and police outside a Magistrate’s court. The media’s severe criticism of the attacks further strained the relations, so much so that in the past few weeks, lawyers had been warning individual journalists visiting the city and the Magistrate’s court of “retaliation”. Meanwhile, Chief Minister, Sadananda Gowda ordered a judicial probe into March 2, 2012 clashes. “After gathering information from various quarters and discussing the issue with Home Minister, R. Ashok, the government has decided to initiate a judicial probe into the shameful and dastardly act of

33 a section of lawyers”, Gowda said. The Chief Minister, however, added that his government would help ease the tension between mediapersons and lawyers rather than exacerbate it with arrests. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated March 3, 2012) Condemning the attack on journalists at Bangalore’s civil court complex on March 2, 2012, Press Council of India Chairman, Justice Markandey Katju has called for “severe punishment” to be meted out to lawyers who allegedly “took the law into their own hands and physically attacked mediapersons”. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated March 3, 2012) A day after the brutal attack on the media at the civil court complex allegedly by the lawyers, the journalist fraternity on March 3, 2012 took out a protest march in Bangalore and demanded arrest of the culprits who were responsible for the inhuman and unprovoked attack on journalists. Meanwhile, a delegation of senior journalists representing all scribes’ associations met Governor, H.R. Bharadwaj who also condemned the incident and assured the journalists that he would take necessary action in this regard. Meanwhile, Corporate Affairs Minister, M. Veerappa Moily sought to blame the BJP Government in Karnataka for the attack on journalists, saying it failed to act beforehand as the trouble was brewing for some time.(, New Delhi dated March 4, 2012) The police on March 3, 2012 cracked down on the lawyers and arrested Ranganath, Santosh, Suresh and Arun Nayak, allegedly accused in March 2, 2012 arson in which the lawyers had attacked and injured the media and policemen under Sections of the Indian Penal Code for rioting, arson, causing mischief and grievous injuries and obstructing officer on duty from performing his functions. “We have identified around 40 lawyers and they will soon be arrested. We have registered 31 cases against the accused”, said Additional Commissioner (Law and Order), T. Sunil Kumar. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated March 4, 2012) The Broadcast Editors’ Association has expressed serious concern over the growing incidents of attacks on the media. The association has constituted a five-member fact-finding Committee to investigate the assault on journalists in Bengaluru and also to look into the Karnataka Assembly incident. Headed by BEA General Secretary, N.K. Singh, the Committee will submit its report within a week. “There seems a pattern in all these incidents suggesting that an attempt is sought to be made to frighten the media into submission”, said the top body of electronic media professionals. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated March 4, 2012)

34 Law Minister, S. Suresh Kumar on March 4, 2012 said the government was trying to arrange a meeting between representatives of the advocate and the media to bring about peace between them. The Minister told Deccan Herald that the lawyers were planning to boycott courts for a day on March 5, 2012. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated March 5, 2012) The Registrar General of the High Court has promised that mediapersons covering the City Civil Court proceedings will be given protection. Acting upon the directions of the Chief Justice (CJ), he also promised to initiate action against the advocates who misbehave with them. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated March 6, 2012) The media and the police in the state came under severe criticism from Karnataka High Court Chief Justice, Vikramjit Sen on March 23, 2012 during the hearing of a series of PILs filed by advocates in connection with the clashes in Bangalore on March 2 between the media, police and lawyers. He indicated that the police was showing reluctance in identifying its officials responsible for the violence. Justice Sen said a CBI inquiry would have to be ordered if the police cannot set its house in order. “There is a reluctance on the part of the police in identifying the guilty offenders. This is an interference in the functioning of the judicial system. I don’t want the functioning of my courts affected again”, Justice Sen said with reference to an 18 day strike by lawyers demanding action against the police and the media. “We don’t want to step into the anarchy that took place that day. We want the truth to emerge as to who was responsible and action must be taken”, he said. On the role of the media, he said there are theories that the police and media were hand-in-glove. “What right does the media have to contrived reporting. Prima facie it seems they wanted things to happen in a certain way and reported it that way”, Justice Sen said. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated March 27, 2012)

Court Cases

The Supreme Court on May 26, 2011 expressed its inability to restrain the media from reporting the inquiry proceedings of the Impeachment Probe

35 Committee against the Sikkim High Court Chief Justice, P.D. , whose counsel made a plea for in-camera hearing by the probe panel. Though agreeing that media reporting on unsubstantiated allegations and sub-judice matters might cause a “life-long” damage to the reputation of a person if the charges against him were later proved to be untrue, a bench of Justices, G.S. Singhvi and C.K. Prasad told Justice, Dinakaran’s counsel that there was no escape from it as the media dominance was a “new trend.” His counsel argued that media reporting has the “danger” of causing prejudice. (The , Hyderabad dated May 27, 2011) The directed the Maharashtra Government and Mumbai Police to submit a status report on the investigations into J. Dey’s murder on June 21, even as the investigators claim about having achieved a breakthrough in the case fell flat on their face. On a day when the embarrassed city crime branch sleuths justified their decision to release the three gangsters within hours of detaining them in connection with Dey’s murder, the High Court also directed Maharashtra Advocate General, Ravi Kadam to remain present in the court on June 21, to argue the matter. The HC division bench of Justices, Ranjana Desai and R.V. More, which is hearing two petitions filed by senior lawyer, V.P. Patil and former journalist, Ketan Tirodkar seeking a CBI inquiry into Dey’s murder, allowed two intervening applications made by two journalist organisations — Press Club, Mumbai and Marathi Patrakar Parishad, which have also made a similar plea. Opposing the transfer of the Dey murder case probe to the CBI, Public Prosecutor, Pandurang Pol informed the High Court that since the investigations in the case were going on in a right direction, there was no need for handing over the case to the CBI at this stage. The Judges, however, asked the State Government and Mumbai Police to let them know of the progress made in the murder probe, through a status report on June 21. (The Pioneer, New Delhi dated June 17, 2011) The Bombay High Court asked the Maharashtra government to file a reply on police officers talking to the media about the J. Dey murder case, while it is under investigation. Expressing concern over varied reports on the case, a division bench of Justices Ranjana Desai and R.V. More said: “This is not restricted to this case. Why should police officers talk to the media about cases which are under investigation?”

36 “Which police officers are the media approaching? Or are some police officers approaching the media? Is this a publicity stunt?” the bench asked Advocate General, Ravi Kadam after the lawyer for the intervention petitioner, ‘Press Club’, Mumbai, submitted a compilation of newspaper articles about the investigation in the case. Advocate, V.P. Patil and journalists Ketan Tirodkar and S. Balakrishnan had filed separate petitions in the High Court seeking a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the case. Counsel for the Press Club, Navroz Seervai raised questions about the impartiality of the Mumbai Police in probing the J. Dey murder case. “How will the police investigate impartially if J. Dey had written articles about the nexus between the underworld and a section of the Mumbai Police,” he asked. “I have a compilation of articles which are very irresponsible. It is shocking to see that the police are deliberately leaking wrong information to the media. They have been contradicting themselves,” Mr. Seervai told the court. He said the police were leaking information about not just the professional life but also the personal life of J. Dey. “There are only three ladies in the family (J. Dey’s family) — an ageing mother, a sister who is not 100 per cent normal and the wife. Such articles disturb them,” he said. There was also a reference to the alleged call of fugitive gangster Chhota Rajan to a TV channel correspondent a few days ago claiming that he ordered the killing. The Advocate General told the court that the reporter was summoned and his statement was recorded after that. Justice Ranjana Desai said the police had already made eight arrests. “They should be given more time to find who is behind this.” “The question is not how much time the Mumbai police will take to crack the case. The question is whether the probe is independent or not. We want to address the qualitative aspect,” she said. Mr. Seervai claimed that the police had not been able to find the real culprits or the masterminds in the case and had only arrested the “small fish.” “If you leave it to them [Mumbai Police], rest assured, you will not get to the bottom of this,” he said. National significance He said the attack on J Dey was of national significance. “This is a part of the frontal attack on our democratic policy itself in the form of brazenly

37 trying to silence the press, which is one of the guardians of Article 19(1)(a) [freedom of speech and expression] of the Constitution,” he said. The court also directed to State to respond about the allegation of the police-underworld nexus. Another petitioner, Mr. Tirodkar said there was no doubt about the integrity and character of the police. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated July 7, 2011) The Bombay High Court dismissed a bunch of petitions seeking CBI probe into the ghastly murder of senior crime reporter Jyotirmoy Dey, after observing that it was difficult for the court to consider this an exceptional case warranting its transfer to the country’s apex investigating agency. “We must state that having perused the report (submitted by the police on July 7, 2011) and having heard learned Advocate General, it is not possible for us to come to a conclusion that investigation of this case is lackadaisical, perfunctory or is not on proper lines,” Justice Ranjana Desai observed a set of PILs filed by advocate, V.P. Patil, veteran journalist, S. Balakrishna and former journalist, Ketan Tirodkar. The Press Club, Mumbai and Marathi Patrakar Parishad had filed intervening applications. Dey, who used to work as an editor (Special Investigations) with Mid-Day, was gunned down from a close range by a group of gangsters at in North-East Mumbai on June 11. The petitioners’ basic contention was that the Dey murder case be handed over to the CBI on the ground they did not expect the Mumbai Police to conduct an ‘impartial’ and ‘honest’ investigations in the Dey case. The petitioners had also averred that the police-underworld nexus would come in the way of effective investigations into the case. However, disagreeing with the apprehensions expressed by the petitioners, the Judge noted, “Though we have power to transfer investigations to CBI, this power has to be used sparingly and in exceptional cases. In the absence of any material on record substantiating the allegation that Mumbai Police, who are investigating this case, have links with the underworld, it is difficult for us to hold that this is an exceptional case warranting transfer to the CBI”. She added, “Assuming that this case has not only national but international ramifications, we do not feel that Mumbai Police cannot successfully investigate it”. As she reposed faith in the abilities of the Mumbai police, the Judge cited the investigations into the 26/11 attacks, in which Pakistani terrorist Mohammed Ajmal Kasab was involved, as a case in point.

38 “In our opinion, the allegation that because Dey was conducting investigative journalism, he has been silenced by underworld and that because the Mumbai Police have links with underworld, they will not carry out impartial investigation is extremely general in nature…. However, there is nothing to even prima facie establish that the officers investigating Dey’s murder have links with the underworld. The necessary material particulars are lacking,” she said. (The Pioneer, New Delhi dated July 19, 2011)

A Special Court dealing with organised crime on December 1, 2011 rejected the Mumbai police plea to conduct narco-test on journalist, Jigna Vora, arrested last week for her alleged involvement in the murder of scribe Jyotirmoy Dey, but extended her police custody till December 5, 2011.

Vora has been charged under Sections 120 (b) (conspiracy) and 302 (murder) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA). The investigating team contended that Vora had “instigated fugitive gangster Sadashiv Nikakalje aka Chhota Rajan against Mid-Day journalist J. Dey”.

The public prosecutor had initially sought an eight-day extension in her custody, saying that it was necessary to recover Vora’s cell phone, which she had sold and retrieve the phone records. “It was a case of professional rivalry over sources”, police said on November 25, 2011 in a press meet while announcing Vora’s arrest. Dey had eulogised Chhota Rajan and thereafter started writing stories having a slant towards Rajan’s rival Chhota Shakil.

Vora, who had started her career as a film journalist before becoming a court reporter, had stated dabbling in police and crime reporting for the last couple of years. The two scribes once had an argument over a small-time stoolie and fixer Farid Tanasha. Following Tanasha’s murder, both Dey and Vora had described Tanasha as “source”.

Irked by this behaviour, Vora had allegedly instigated Rajan against Dey over phone, records of which the police claims to have ferreted out. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated December 2, 2011)

The Special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court on December 24, 2011 rejected the application of arrested scribe Jigna Vora seeking gag on the media on the ground that it was allegedly publishing defamatory information about her.

Jigna Vora, Deputy Bureau Chief of Asian Age has been under arrest under MCOCA charges in the case of the murder of senior crime reporter of Mid-day, J. Dey.

39 “The court observed that prima facie, no case could be made out for defamation. The judge said that no restraint can be ordered on the media as it is not a party to the case”, special public prosecutor, Dileep Shah said: “The court also said that MCOCA court is not the proper authority to hear defamation cases”, he said. Ms. Vora had moved an application in the court seeking restrictions on the media reporting of the J. Dey murder case. She had said that reports on the case were being published without naming the source of the information and that the content about her was defamatory in nature. She had pleaded that the media should print the names of the sources who had been giving information about the case. Move lower court “The court stated that no prima facie evidence was produced by the applicant showing her defamation. There is no material to show that she is defamed by virtue of the press printing the proceedings of the court hearing. “Moreover, the court is not the proper authority for hearing defamation cases. For that, the applicant will have to move a lower court”, Mr. Shah said. Ms. Vora had also pleaded earlier that the entire trial be conducted in- camera. The other accused objected to the plea and wanted their say in the matter also to be recorded. She later withdrew that plea. Copies given Meanwhile, the court on December 24, 2011 handed over the truncated copies of the confession statements of three accused, Arun Dake, Deepak Sisodiya and Vinod , to their lawyers. This will enable them to file their bail plea. The court also provided copies of the statements of three witnesses recorded by the police. Retracts confession One of the accused has retracted the confession statement saying that he was threatened by the police and he did not know the contents of the statement. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated December 25, 2011) Five years after it had upheld the expulsion of 11 MPs in the cash-for- questions scam, the Supreme Court dismissed the Delhi Police’s bid to prosecute the two journalists who had conducted the sting operation.

40 As a corollary, a 2010 Delhi High Court ruling that corruption can be exposed by undercover journalists without informing authorities has attained finality. A bench headed by Justice Aftab Alam dismissed the special leave petition filed by the police against the High Court verdict quashing the charge sheet in relation to Aniruddha Bahal and Suhasini Raj of cobrapost.com. The SC agreed with the HC view that if the journalists had taken the police into confidence about their operation to expose MPs accepting bribes to ask questions in Parliament, “the respective MPs would have been given information by the police beforehand and would have been cautioned about the entire operation.” This has scuttled the police’s attempt to prosecute the journalists along with the MPs and middlemen on account of their alleged failure to act as complainants before the story titled “Operation Duryodhan” was aired in December 2005. The police had tried to implicate the journalists on the ground that every person aware of the commission of an offence was obliged to inform the nearest police officer. The implication of the SC’s decision is that undercover journalists can well claim immunity under Section 24 of the Prevention of Corruption Act which stipulates that a statement made somebody who offered a bribe to a public servant “shall not subject such person to a prosecution” on the charge of abetting the offence. This is the first time the SC was to decide if they should be tried. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated October 18, 2011) The Delhi High Court agreed to hear a plea whether there should be prohibition against any write-up that does not confine criticism to a verdict but “personally attacks” a judge and his judicial acumen. Admitting a petition that highlighted a lawyer’s “defamatory” article on his website relating to the verdict in the 1999 Shivani Bhatnagar murder case, a division bench of Acting Chief Justice, A.K. Sikri and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw decided to hear the arguments on the issue if there could be a restraint in the form of a judicial order against such practice. The petition filed by a lawyer had brought to the notice of the court an article written by advocate Ashok Arora, a former Secretary of the Supreme Court Bar Association, on the verdict delivered by a division bench of the court on October 12. The verdict had acquitted former Haryana IGP, R.K. Sharma and two others serving a life term in the killing of The Indian Express journalist, Shivani Bhatnagar, clearing them of all charges.

41 The judgment, which overturned a trial court verdict, was inconclusive on why and at whose instance Shivani was killed. However, it said, it could not convict the three accused on the basis of the insufficient and unreliable evidence put before it by the prosecution, giving the three “benefit of doubt”. Only Pradeep Sharma’s life sentence was upheld, with the High Court saying there was adequate evidence to prove his guilt. Arora, in his article dated October 17, had commented on the merits of the judgement, prompting advocate Manish Kaushik to seek initiation of criminal contempt proceeding against him. The petition sought immediate order to block the content on the website and also stop the circulation of the impugned article. During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General, A.S. Chandhiok, appearing for the Central Government, and Delhi Government’s standing counsel, Najmi Waziri requested the bench to widen the ambit of the petition and ensure by way of a judicial order that nobody through a write-up could attack on the judges with respect to any verdict. “Any article cannot state that judges did not have the knowledge of law. There could not be any personal attack. We would request the lordship to look into this,” Chandhiok said. At this, Justice Sikri accepted his request and agreed to hear the legal arguments on the issue. Also accepting that the matter involved immediate intervention, the court ordered the DCP, Cyber Crime Cell, to immediately take steps to remove the article and stop its circulation henceforth. It also issued notices to Arora and to the Central and State Governments, Delhi High Court, Bar Council of India and Bar Council of Delhi for November 9. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated October 25, 2011) Fair reporting of court proceedings and fair comments on the legal issues do not amount to contempt, the Supreme Court has ruled. “The power to punish for contempt is inherent in courts of record and described as a necessary incident to every court of justice. The power is an alienable attribute of court and inheres in every court of record. This power, though inherent to the High Court, is given a constitutional status by Article 215”, said a Bench of Justices H.L. Dattu and C. K. Prasad. Writing the judgment, Justice Prasad said: “It (contempt power) is to secure public respect and confidence in the judicial process. Rule of law is the

42 basic rule of governance of any civilized democratic polity. It is only through the courts that rule of law unfolds its contours and establishes its concept”. For the judiciary to discharge its obligations effectively and true to the spirit with which it was sacredly entrusted with the task, constitutional courts had been given the power to punish for contempt. But the greater the power, the higher the responsibility, said the Bench. In the instant case, H.G. Rangangoud was aggrieved by the Karnataka High Court order initiating contempt proceedings suo-motu, taking a serious view of a communication sent by the State Government to the Centre for grant of a mining lease in favour of a company. While the State recommended grant of the lease in favour of the appellant, the Centre issued a notification reserving the area of iron ore deposits for exploitation by the State Trading Corporation and returned the recommendation. A single judge of the High Court, however, quashed the notification. Even as a writ appeal was pending before a Division Bench, the State again sent a communication to the Centre for grant of the mining lease to the appellant. The Bench construed this as interference with the due course of judicial process and initiated contempt proceedings against the appellant and K. Jayachandra, then Under Secretary, Department of Commerce and Industries. Allowing the appeal against this order, the Supreme Court said: “Mere filing of the representation and making a recommendation thereon in no way prejudice or interfere, or tend to interfere, with the due course of any judicial proceeding. It is criminal contempt to voice opinion on a case pending in court as that would seem to influence the outcome of the matter and to prejudice the parties. However, we hasten to add that fair reporting of court proceedings and fair comments on the legal issues do not amount to contempt.” Holding that initiating contempt proceedings against the appellant and Mr. Jayachandra was not just and appropriate, and was an abuse of the process of the court, the Bench set aside the order. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated November 15, 2011) The Supreme Court on November 14, 2011 declined to relax a Bombay High Court order asking Times Now TV Channel to deposit Rs. 100 crore – Rs. 20 crore in cash and the rest as bank guarantee – before taking up its appeal against a trial court verdict in a defamation case. Former Supreme Court Judge, Justice P.B. Sawant, had sued Times Now for mistakenly displaying his photograph in a report on September 10, 2008, about a person (with a phonetically similar sounding name) allegedly involved in

43 the multi-crore Provident Fund scam. A trial court had decreed the suit for Rs. 100 crore against the TV channel. Times Now had appealed against the trial court verdict, but the Mumbai HC in September this year had asked the TV channel to first deposit Rs. 20 crore and provide Rs. 80 crore as bank guarantee as a pre-condition for hearing the appeal. Appearing for the TV channel, senior advocate said the channel had apologized for the mistake and had run an apology for five continuous days and requested the apex court to relax the stiff condition of depositing Rs. 100 crore as a pre- condition for appeal. A bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and S.J. Mukhopadhaya declined to grant relief to petitioner Times Global Broadcasting Company Ltd., which owns the TV channel, saying there was no error in the High Court’s interim order. “We find no reason to interfere with High Court’s order directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 20 crore and furnish bank guarantee for the rest”, the bench said. However, the bench clarified that the HC would decide the appeal on its merit without being influenced by the apex court’s decision to dismiss the appeal against the pre-condition of depositing the amount. When contacted, Times Now channel head, Arnab Goswami said, “We are extremely apologetic to Justice Sawant for the mistake and any personal damage done to his reputation because of the inadvertent error of running his picture instead of another judge. The picture ran for only about 15 seconds, and was a genuine oversight in the course of a broadcast. We deeply regret the mistake and assure Justice Sawant that it was not part of any intentional malice in reporting”. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated November 15, 2011) The Supreme Court has directed the Chhattisgarh government to permit the broadcast of Etv channel, seven days after the channel was “blacked out” by the state for running a report about the alleged involvement of Chief Minister, ’s relatives in a scandal involving allocation of mines. The order by a Bench of Justices and came on a petition filed by the channel’s Chhattisgarh Bureau Chief, Shailesh Pandey, contending that their “abrupt silencing” was a violation of free speech and expression under the Constitution. The court also issued notices to Chief Minister, Raman Singh, who is a party by name, the State Home Secretary, Raipur Collector, among other senior officials concerned. They have to represent their case by January 5.

44 “Respondent 1 (State of Chhattisgarh) is directed to permit the broadcasting of Etv in the States of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh and we hope and trust that the petitioner would maintain sanctity of freedom of speech and expression”, the Bench observed in its order on December 16. Pandey, who was represented by senior advocate, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, argued, “against the high-handed approach and arbitrary exercise of power by Raman Singh, Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh, whereby a prominent news channel of the area, Etv, Chhattisgarh, has been abruptly silenced after a story showing favouritism in allocation of mines to in-laws of the CM was aired by it, eventually leading to a forced blackout of the channel in whole of the State of Chhattisgarh because of the ire of the Chief Minister”. The story was aired on December 7. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated December 20, 2011)

A sessions court on February 1, 2012 ordered issue of summons to N. Ram, former Editor-in-Chief of The Hindu, and B. Kolappan, Special Correspondent, for their appearance on March 5 on a complaint by the City Public Prosecutor (CPP), on behalf of Chief Minister, Jayalalithaa, for publishing a news item, which “defamed” her. In the complaint, the CPP stated that the newspaper, while reporting the attack on the office of Nakkheeran here on January 7, purportedly repeated an article, which had appeared in the Tamil bi-weekly, relating to the Chief Minister. The impugned news item has been “published by the accused solely with the intent to malign the reputation of the Hon’ble Chief Minister in the discharge of her functions and duties”. The complainant prayed the court to punish the accused for alleged offences under Sections 500 and 501 IPC. Mr. Kolappan, author of the news item, and Mr. Ram have been cited as accused in the complaint. Taking the complaint on file, Principal Sessions Judge (PSJ) P. Kalaiyarasan ordered issue of summons to the two for their appearance. The PSJ also ordered issue of summons for the appearance of the Nakkheeran Gopal, Printer, Publisher and Editor, A. Kamaraj, Joint Editor, and Umarmukhtat, reporter of the bi-weekly, on March 1. The Judge passed the order on a complaint by the CPP stating that the article ‘defamed’ the Chief Minister. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated February 2, 2012)

45 The Supreme Court on February 3, 2012 permitted industrialist, to approach the Centre for disclosure of certain contents of the confidential report placed before it over the interception of secret conversations of politicians, bureaucrats and media personnel with their corporate lobbyist, Nira Radia.

A bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and S.J. Mukhopadhyaya, which allowed the submission of counsel, Mukul Rohtagi for the Tatas’, asked the Centre to pass an appropriate order as to whether it can disclose the contents or was seeking immunity from disclosure of the information.

The apex court said it will examine at a later stage the alleged role of some private operators in the telephone tapping controversy. The bench further directed the court staff to re-seal the confidential report placed before it on January 31 by the Government and adjourned the matter.

Earlier, the Centre had informed the apex court that the Radia tapes, which found its way into the hands of media organisations, were tampered and Government agencies were not responsible for its leakage.

Placing a report in a sealed envelope before the bench, the Government had said that 8 to 10 agencies were involved in the tapping of conversations of former corporate lobbyist Nira Radia which included service providers.

The report said the starting and the end point of the conversations do not match with the original tapes, Justice Singhvi had earlier said while referring to the report.

He said the report also said officers, who had conducted the probe, do not know who had leaked the tapes. “It is quite possible that someone else has done it”, the bench said. (The Pioneer, New Delhi dated February 3, 2012)

The Delhi High Court on February 8, 2012 asked the government to constitute a Committee on a plea that sought guidelines to regulate media reporting and disclosure of details about children in cases like that of the two- year-old battered baby, Falak, who is admitted at AIIMS.

A bench headed by the High Çourt Chief Justice took suo-motu cognizance of a letter written to him for framing of guidelines for media reporting on such sensitive issues. The court also sought a response from the Centre as well as the state government within a week.

Falak was admitted to AIIMs on January 18 with severe head injuries and human bite marks all over her face.

46 The HC said the Committee will comprise the presiding officer of the Juvenile Justice Board, representatives of the Central and Delhi Governments, National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, Press Council of India, media and NGOs. The letter pointed to the media rush to report on Falak and the teenager who allegedly brought the baby to the hospital. “Media reporting has sensationalized the life of both children in a way, and to such an extent that these children will never be able to get away from the memories of this time”, the letter said. The lawyer also argued: “India being a signatory to United Nations Convention on Child Rights is under obligation to ensure protection of law against any unlawful intervention into the privacy of a child or any attack on child’s honour”. “The Committee will deliberate on the issue and file a report by March 7”, the bench said taking note of the central argument of the lawyer that even in the past several reports by media had disclosed details of children and other juveniles even though this is prohibited under law. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated February 9, 2012) The High Court on March 8, 2012 ordered notice to the Centre, Information and Broadcasting Ministry, the State Government, print and electronic media, following two PILs seeking directions to the media to telecast the visuals of the attack on lawyers during the violence in the City Civil Court complex on March 2. The petitioners, Advocates Association of Bangalore, sought a direction to the print and electronic media to publish or telecast the clippings and videos showing the assault on lawyers. They contended that the act of the electronic media in showing “one-sided version” of the incident and its “failure” to broadcast the footage which shows the alleged assault on the advocates was against “professional ethics and conduct”. A similar PIL filed by advocate, Prasad Hiremath also sought a similar direction and blamed two regional channels for “wrong and false reporting” of three police constables having died during the violence, which was later openly refuted by City Police Commissioner, Jyothiprakash Mirji in one of the local channel. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Vikramajit Sen and Justice B.V. Nagarathna ordered issue of notices to the respondents in the two PILs and

47 adjourned the matter to March 14, 2012. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated March 9, 2012) A five judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court will hear from the third week of this month suggestions on framing guidelines for the media on court reporting with a view to ensuring that day-day-proceedings are not distorted or misreported. Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia, heading a three-judge Bench, gave this indication on March 13, 2012 after referring to a news item pertaining to the former CJI, K.G. Balakrishnan, that appeared in an English newspaper. Justice Kapadia said: “We are all upset at the report. Some statements have been attributed to Attorney – General, G.E. Vahanvati which he never stated in court. We constitute a Constitution Bench to frame guidelines for reporting by the media”. The CJI then asked senior lawyers Fali Nariman and K.K. Venugopal and the Attorney- General to assist the court in formulating the issues and in framing guidelines. Justice Kapadia referred to a complaint made to him by Mr. Venugopal, during the hearing of writ petition relating to the former Central Vigilance Commissioner, P.J. Thomas about misreporting of his arguments by an anchor and his request that the court take action against the television channel concerned. The CJI told Mr. Venugopal that he did not file any application in this regard. However, after the CJI made a request, Mr. Venugopal readily agreed to assist the court. Recently, Mr. Nariman also took exception to a news item, published in a section of the media, about an agreement between Sahara Investments and the Securities and Exchange Board of India even before the Supreme Court approved it. On the CJI’s advice, Mr. Nariman has already filed an application to bring on record the misreporting. Now, the Constitution Bench is expected to hear specific instances as well as general issues and frame guidelines. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated March 15, 2012) In what may spark a debate on the judiciary’s role to advice the media on reportage, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice of India, S.H. Kapadia on March 20, 2012 convened to take up the issue of framing guidelines for media to report cases in courts. The short hearing in the morning was followed by a public notice issued on the SC’s official website later in the day, indicating that the Bench will start

48 hearing the matter “relating to the framing of guidelines for reporting of cases in media” on and from March 27.

The notice said the Chief Justice of India has “directed that any party, who desires to make submissions in the matter may do so by way of intervention” in the case.

The guidelines, once framed, may significantly draw the line for the media in exercise of its derived right to freedom of press under Article 19 of the Constitution without interfering with justice administration.

The Bench, also comprising Justices D.K. Jain, S.S. Nijjar, J.S. Khehar and Ranjana Prakash Desai, has called upon eminent senior advocates from the Supreme Court Bar like Fali Nariman, K.K. Venugopal, T.R. Andhyarujina to assist it.

The setting up of the Constitution Bench by the CJI follows complaints about instances on misreporting of court hearings and leak of confidential information causing prejudice to litigants. The CJI on March 20, 2012 indicated that the issue involves “values” and needs a full hearing.

Advocate Anup Bhambhani, who appeared for the News Broadcasters Association, which intervened in the case, said the guidelines would apply to reporting from all courts in the country as it may cover issues like protecting the “right to fair trial” without trial by media for an accused, leak of confidential information which would prejudice parties in a case pending in a court and also touch on the right to witness protection. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated March 21, 2012)

The Supreme Court on March 27, 2012 indicated it might lay down do’s and don’ts for the media on the reporting of sub-judice criminal cases with a view to protecting the right of the accused to a fair trial.

“We have to balance Article 21 with Article 19(1)(a),” a Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice, S.H. Kapadia said.

Article 21 of the Constitution entitles all accused to a fair trial, while Article 19(1)(a) deals with the freedom of speech and expression, including the freedom of the media.

The bench was hearing a petition from Sahara India, which has complained about the media reporting of a proposal it had made to the Securities and Exchange Board of India. The company claims the news reports affected its market valuation.

49 Justices D.K. Jain, S.S. Nijjar, Ranjana Desai and J.S. Khehar expressed concern at the so-called media trails. “The media creates a mindset about what is right or wrong. When the judgment is not on those lines, the judge’s image is tarnished and all sorts of motives are attributed to him”, Justice Khehar observed. He said the bench was especially concerned about instances of the media projecting an accused as guilty as soon as he was arrested, reporting the trail in the same vein, and pushing for a particular sentence. Sahara counsel Fali S. Nariman created a stir, saying the court could issue orders in specific cases but not lay down general guidelines. “Even it is does, how is the court going to enforce it in the absence of a law backing it?” he wondered. Justice Kapadia said the court was not interested in controlling media content but added that 11 complaints about misreporting of court proceedings were pending. Nariman continued to insist that, in the absence of a law, the court lacked the power to lay down guidelines that would result in punishment for erring reporters. “It can’t be a judge’s whims, “ he said. “All sorts of lawyers and judges say all sorts of things. We can’t build a wall around us…This is not a club”. Nariman counselled self-restraint on the part of judges as well as the media. He said he could not suggest any general principle to deal with misreporting as that would amount to unnecessary restrictions on the media. Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati said any guideline could only be normative and not coercive. “The media is the public surrogate”, he said and then quoted the 18th century English utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham: “Publicity is the very soul of justice”. An aggrieved person can always seek damages or press defamation charges. Vahanvati pointed out, but advised the media to regulate itself. The bench expressed dissatisfaction at the media’s practice of issuing denials or clarifications after the damage has been done and sought to know if the court could take preventive action. Hearing continues tomorrow. The Press Council of India, Editors’ Guild and the National Broadcasters’Association are representing the media but are yet to present their views. (, Kolkata dated March 28, 2012)

50 Attorney General G.E. Vahanvati on March 28, 2012 told the Supreme Court that the Centre was considering Law Commission’s 200th report titled “Trial by Media”, which recommended amendments to the contempt of court laws to empower the judiciary to impose restrictions on reporting to curb possible interference in the administration of justice, protect fair trial and right of accused.

The AG’s response came after senior advocate Fali S. Nariman told the court that the Law Commission’s August, 2006 report elaborately dealt with reporting of sub-judice matters but the government had neither rejected it nor bothered to act on it.

The Commission had said, “There is a need to empower courts to pass ‘postponement’ orders as to publication. While courts have held that conditions for passing orders of prior restraint should be permitted only under stringent conditions, it is, however, accepted that temporary postponement of publication can be passed. This is accepted in several jurisdictions across the world”.

The Commission also said publications prejudicial to the person after his arrest relating to his character, previous convictions and alleged confessions could also amount to contempt of court. It said interviewing witnesses after filing of chargesheet was highly objectionable even under the existing law, but a lack of knowledge of contempt laws in the media resulted in its abuse.

The court pointed out to page 171 of the Law Commission report which referred to an Australian Law Reforms Commission report on Contempt and Prejudice to Jury saying that reports of legal proceedings might contain material which could prejudice a jury trial. The Australian panel said that a court should have the power to postpone publication of a report of any part of proceedings “if it is satisfied that the publication could give rise to substantial risk that the fair trial of an accused for an indictable offence might be prejudiced because of the influence which the publication may have on jurors”.

The court said it would lay down guidelines which would remain in force till the government framed appropriate law. “If administration of justice is affected, we will act”, it said. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated March 29, 2012)

The Supreme Court has decided to examine whether the printer and publisher of a newspaper or magazine is a necessary party in criminal defamation proceedings when the editor is already cited as an accused in a defamation complaint.

51 A Bench of Justices P. Sathasivam and J. Chelameswar in a brief order on March 16, 2012 said: “The important question arises (in this petition), namely, in a case of complaint under Sections 499, 500 and 506 Indian Penal Code, whether the ‘Publisher’ in a newspaper is a necessary party in the said proceedings apart from editor who has been shown as one of the accused”. Special Leave Petition The Bench framed the important question on a Special Leave Petition filed by a reporter of challenging the exclusion of the publisher of Dainik Bhaskar newspaper on the ground that he was not a necessary party since the editor had already been cited as an accused in the defamation complaint filed under IPC Sections 499(Criminal Defamation), 500 (Punishment for Criminal Defamation) and 506 (Criminal Intimidation). After hearing counsel for the petitioner, the Bench issued notice to Haryana and the publisher returnable in four weeks. In the instant case, appellant Dal Singh Roherian, Punjab Kesari reporter, was aggrieved by a news item published in Dainik Bhaskar with his photograph. Alleging that the news item was published with a malafide intention to harm his reputation and to lower his image in the eyes of the public, he filed a defamation complaint before the Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal, who issued summons to three respondents including the printer and publisher, Ramesh Chand Aggarwal. After the sessions court declined to interfere with the order, the publisher filed a revision petition and the Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside the order of summons issued by the lower court in so far as he was concerned. The present appeal is directed against this order. “Malafide intent” The appellant contended that Mr. Aggarwal being the printer and publisher of the newspaper would be a necessary party in criminal defamation proceedings as the news item was published with a malafide intention. He prayed for quashing of the High Court order. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated March 16, 2012)

Media Round Up

Shri Vibhuti Sharma, Resident Editor, Nai Duniya, Jabalpur was awarded with Makhanlal Chaturvedi Award on April 22, 2011 for excellent journalism by

52 Madhavrao Sapre Samachar Patra Sanghralaya Avum Shodh Sansthan. (Nai Duniya, New Delhi dated April 19, 2011) The Chennai based English national daily The Hindu decided to appoint Siddharth Varadarajan, National Bureau Chief, New Delhi, its editor. He will report to Editor-in-Chief, N. Ram. The daily has also decided to adopt the principle of separating ownership and management “not only on the editorial side” but “also on the business side”. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated April 23, 2011)

In its latest report on the state of internet, Freedom House – a US based organization monitoring democratic changes, human rights and freedom of speech – ranked India 14th among 37 countries that were assessed on the basis of free and unrestricted access to the web. Estonia topped the list. According to the report, the internet is only “partly free” in India – even though there is no substantial political censorship, bloggers and online users have been arrested in the last two years. Among Asian countries, India ranks second. The country scored 36 on a scale of 100. South Korea (32) topped in the continent. In 2009, India’s score was 34. “The Indian blogosphere is quite active and eloquent, complementing the rise in internet use by different interest groups and civil society actors. Bloggers are rarely forced by the government or private individuals to take down their writings, but there have been a few instances in which this has occurred”, the report says. As far as global trends are concerned, in democratic countries like Brazil, India, Indonesia, South Korea, Turkey, and the UK, internet freedom is increasingly undermined by legal harassment, opaque ownership procedures, or expanding surveillance. “The new internet restrictions around the globe are partly a response to the explosion in popularity of advanced applications like Facebook through which users can post own content”, the report says. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated April 24, 2011)

Dainik Jagran was awarded with WAN IFRA 2010 award a prestigious award of International Newspapers World in breaking news category for its news “Abhutpurv Muftkhori”, 74 Crore Kee Tickets Banti Thi Muft’. Dainik Jagran is the only Hindi newspaper that won the WAN IFRA 2010 Award for its breaking news revealing the free distribution of tickets scandal in Common Wealth Games by its Bureau Chief, Shri Anshuman Tiwari. Financial Times

53 and Yaman Observer were two other newspapers who had won this award. (Dainik Jagran, New Delhi dated April 30, 2011) The Express Group has entered into a content partnership with the Financial Times in India. The agreement, formally announced by Group Editor-in-Chief, The Express Group, will soon see FT content carried on branded pages in The Financial Express and The Indian Express. With a strong line up of columnists such as Meghnad Desai, Rajesh Chakrabarti, Surjit S. Bhalla, M. Govinda Rao, Arindam Bhattacharya, Mahesh Vyas, Ila Patnaik, Sunil Jain and M.K. Venu, new content from the Financial Times will provide readers of The Financial Express and The Indian Express indepth analysis with a global perspective. In addition to daily news and features from the Financial Times, readers will benefit from access to reporting from FT bureaus around the world and columns by eminent writers such as Martin Wolf, Lucy Kellaway and Simon Schama. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated May 4, 2011) The Congress has decided to re-launch , a newspaper started more than 70 years ago by India’s first Prime Minister, . Preparations are in full swing as can be seen from the swanky renovated building – Herald House at Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg in national capital – from where the newspaper published its last edition on April 1, 2008. The building has been renovated giving it a new look with silver grey tiles and glass windowpanes dominating the front of the building. The Congress is planning to reopen the office to coincide with the birth anniversary of Jawaharlal Nehru on November 14. “We are working to re-launch the paper in next few months”, said Motila Vohra, Congress treasurer. The party is also planning to re-launch the edition of the paper – . It will be published from the same building. Both National Herald and Qaumi Awaz were started by Nehru in 1938 in . “We will bring out both English and Urdu edition at the moment”, Vohra said. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated May 6, 2011) Mr. Naresh Mohan, an outstanding print media industry professional with over 51 years experience in business management, is joining the Board of Trustees of Trust as a member. He was chosen unanimously at a Trust meeting presided over by the President, Mr. R.S. Talwar, in New Delhi on May 6, 2011. (The Tribune, Chandigarh dated May 10, 2011) Following the footsteps of most southern political parties which have their own media outlets, the Telangana Rashstra Samiti led by K. Chandrashekhar Rao too had launched a television channel some time back mainly to propagate its views on Telangana. Now, it is adding media band-width by coming out with a daily next week. To be called Namaste Telangana, the multi-edition daily,

54 TRS leaders say, will counter the media offensive launched by anti Telangana formations. Set up as a private venture called Telangana Broadcasting Corporation, the party’s news channel called, “T News” is already competing with other media networks for eyeballs in the Telangana region. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated May 31, 2011)

Chief Election Commissioner, S.Y. Quraishi launched the Delhi edition of the Tamil daily from group, Chennai on June 3, 2011. This is the eighth edition of the popular newspaper. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated June 5, 2011)

A staff reporter and three contributors for were selected for Charkha awards 2010. Rajashekhar Koti of ‘Andolana’ newspaper in Mysore has been chosen for the Mentor Award for Encouragement to Development Journalism, instituted by the Communication for Development and Learning for Excellence in Development Journalism in Kannada. Dr. T.R. Chandrsekhara’s report, “Vyavasaya Vyathe Abhivridhiya Kathe” and Dr. Leela Sampige’s write- up on “HIV/AIDS” won them the award. Sharada Gopal’s “Stree Sabalikarnadatta Mattondu Hejje” got her the award in the women’s category, and Prajavani staff reporter Manjushree M. Kadakola’s report on sanitation won her the recognition. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated June 25, 2011) Shri Vikas Kumar Jha, journalist and writer of Bihar was awarded with 16th International Indu Sharma Story Award by Ms. Nalini Suri, High Commissioner of India in House of Commons in Britain. Hindi writer Ms. Nina Pal was also awarded with 12th Parmanand Literature Award. (Nai Dunia, New Delhi dated June 29, 2011)

The Sanskriti Pratishthan announced Sukhada Tatke, Senior Correspondent, The Times of India, Mumbai as the recipient of the Prabha Dutt Fellowship for Excellence in Journalism for the year 2010. As part of the fellowship, Tatke has been selected to study the ‘condition of the children left behind by the farmers who commit suicide due to debt in Vidarbha’. The fellowship is for a period of 10 months, and offers an amount of Rs. 1,00,000. “This fellowship, exclusively for print journalists, is to encourage dedicated women journalists in the age group of 25-40 years to pursue meaningful projects, including research or a book in English, Hindi or any regional language”, read an official statement. The Prabha Dutt Fellowship is organised and conducted under the auspices of Sanskriti Pratishthan, New Delhi. “The Sanskriti-Prabha Dutt Fellowship was instituted to honour and perpetuate the memory of late Prabha Dutt, whose bright and promising career as a fearless journalist with The Hindustan Times

55 and India Today was cut short”, the statement read. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated July 13, 2011) For the first time since its inception 15 years ago, the Prem Bhatia Awards for excellence in political reporting and analysis as well as that for excellence in environmental reporting have been shared by two journalists each. The award for political reporting goes to Josy Joseph of The Times of India for his consistently fine reporting of the scandals that have made headlines like the 2-G Spectrum allocation, Commonwealth Games and Adarsh Housing Society scams. Jyotirmoy Dey of Mid-Day shares the award posthumously for his superlative work all through his career in exposing Mumbai’s underworld and corruption in the police and bureaucracy, and he had to pay for that with his life. Dey was recently killed by one of the Mumbai mafias. The two winners of the environmental award are Madhuraj, Chief News Photographer of Matrubhumi, for his vivid photographs that focused national and international attention on the catastrophic consequences of the use of pesticide in Kerala, and G. Nirmala, who has written powerfully on the same subject in one of the publications of Samakalika Malyalam Vaarike. Both awards will presented at the annual Prem Bhatia Memorial Lecture on August 11. (The Tribune, Chandigarh dated July 27, 2011) Veteran journalist and former parliamentarian Inder Jit, who was the Managing Director and Editor of India News & Feature Alliance (INFA), died on July 31, 2011 following a prolonged illness. Inder Jit played an active role in the creation of the Tripartite Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council in 1989 and was subsequently elected to the Lok Sabha in 1989 and 1991-96 from Darjeeling. He started his journalistic career with The London Times, The Daily Telegraph and was the political and parliamentary correspondent of The Times of India between 1954 and 1962. He joined INFA as its Editor in 1962. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated August 1, 2011) Prime Minister Manmohan Singh paid rich tribute to late K.M. Mathew, the iconic Chief Editor of Malayala Manorama, describing him as an “Indian legend”, as he received an album containing commemorative stamp on Mathew issued by the Department of Posts from HRD Minister Kapil Sibal on August 2, 2011. The album also contained the First Day Cover honouring Mathew, which was released on August 1, 2011 Mathew’s first death anniversary. Sibal said Mathew was a true nationalist who promoted great values through his newspaper and worked hard for national integration and communal harmony. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated August 3, 2011) Hindustan Media Ventures Ltd. (HMVL) has been named by Forbes as one of the Best Under A Billion companies in the Asia Pacific region. It is one

56 of the 39 Indian companies that have found a place on Forbes Asia’s list of 200. HMVL, the publisher of Hindustan, one of India’s leading Hindi language dailies, is the only Indian media company in the list. To qualify for the list, companies must have annual revenue between $5 million (Rs. 23 crore) and $1 billion (Rs. 4,500 crore) and be publicly traded for at least a year. “Being included on this list is a testament to our commitment towards our readers and customers,” said Amit Chopra, CEO, HMVL. “This honour has bolstered our objective of maintaining the highest standards of journalistic integrity and remaining the preferred daily across the Hindi belt. (The Hindustan Times, New Delhi dated September 5, 2011)

The Hindu’s Chhattisgarh correspondent, Aman Sethi, has won the International Committee of the Red Cross award for the best Indian print media article on humanitarian issues. His article on three Chhattisgarh villages ruthlessly torched by police commandos in March 2011 was selected as the best of nearly 80 entries from across the country. At the ICRC awards presented on October 19, 2011 at the India Islamic Cultural Centre, ’s Umar Baba took the second place, while the third prize went to Reji Joseph of Rashtra and the consolation prize to Anup Sharma of The Times of India. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated October 20, 2011)

The Indian Express is now available on iPad. Within days of its launch, it was among the top 10 free applications on Apple iStore on November 21, 2011. The reader-friendly app has much more than the regular newspaper app — it also has the day’s e-paper, an electronic version of the print edition. “There’s a growing need across the world for news and analysis from India that’s insightful, credible and trustworthy. That’s what The Express is all about. The e-paper on app, the first of its kind, allows readers across the world to read the day’s newspaper on their iPad just the way they would read a printed copy. The e-paper has pages and sections of the paper’s different editions. There is a dedicated photo section with swiftly downloadable pictures of the day. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated November 22, 2011)

Soma Basu, a reporter with The Statesman in Kolkata, was on December 6, 2011 conferred the CMS-PANOS Young Environment Journalist Award 2011 in the print media category at the inaugural ceremony of the sixth international edition of CMS Vatavaran environment and wildlife film festival. The CMS awards are presented for excellence in environmental journalism to individuals who have done “exemplary investigative and inspired reporting on environmental issues in the country. Manu C. Kumar of Manorama News, Mumbai, won the award in the electronic media category. (The Statesman, New Delhi dated December 7, 2011)

57 Deccan Herald, has launched its edition on December 10, 2011 in the national capital. It is the seventh for the newspaper, and the first outside Karnataka. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated December 11, 2011) The first edition of T. S. Satyan Memorial awards for photojournalism was presented to six distinguished photographers from the field on December 18,2011. The award is named after Satyan, considered the country’s foremost and one of the first photojournalists. Lifetime Achievement award: Yagneshwara Acharya ‘Yagna’ (), Best Newspaper Photography: K. Gopinathan (Bangalore), Best Professional Photography: Netra Raju (Mysore), Best Magazine Photography: Bhanu Prakash Chandra (Bangalore), Best Freelance Photography: Regret Iyer (Bangalore) and Best Online Photography: M S Gopal. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated December 19, 2011) Lokmanya Tilak Rashtriya Award was given to Shri Shravan Garg, Group Editor, Dainik Bhaskar Newspapers Group, Member, Press Council of India, and Member, Rashtriya Akta Parishad for his remarkable contribution in journalism on the occasion of 131st establishment day of Kesari, Marathi Dainik. (Dainik Bhaskar, New Delhi dated January 3, 2012) All India Yunani Tibbi Congress decided to give award to Shri Ras Bihari, Metro Editor, Nai Dunia for his creative work in journalism. On the occasion of 9th Rashtriya Adhivesan of Vishwa Yunani Day on January 12 the award was given to Shri Ras Bihari in the presence of eminent personalities. (Nai Dunia, New Delhi dated January 9, 2012) , India’s first woman photo-journalist, passed away on January 15, 2012. Vyarawalla clicked some memorable pictures between 1938 and 1970. The pictures of first tri-colour-hoisting after Independence, the death of , the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru releasing a pigeon and others have become part of national archives. She also worked for British Information Service for many years. She was awarded , India’s second highest civilian award, last year and was also conferred with Lifetime Achievement Award by the Information and Broadcasting Ministry in 2010. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated January 16, 2012) Vinod Mehta on February 1, 2012 quit as Chief Editor of Óutlook’, after being in the post for 17 years. He will continue as advisor of the magazine. Krishna Prasad, at present the Editor, will now assume the post of Chief Editor.

58 One of the senior-most editors of the country, Mehta has been editor of several publications, including Pioneer, The Sunday Observer, The Independent and The Indian Post. (Deccan Herald, Bangalore dated February 2, 2012) The big media group Dainik Bhaskar started its printing unit from Raigarh on February 18, 2012. The function was inaugurated by Dr. Raman Singh, Chief Minister of the State. (Dainik Bhaskar, New Delhi dated February 18, 2012) The Culture Secretary, Mr. Jawahar Sircar, is to be the next CEO of National Broadcaster, Prasar Bharati after a three member panel headed by the Vice-President, Mr. Hamid Ansari recommended his name to the government. (The Statesman, New Delhi dated February 18, 2012)

Devi Cherian, journalist and social worker was awarded with Amar Shahid Lala Jagat Narayan Memorial Award for her specialization of analysis in social and political matters and her contribution in journalism. The award was presented to her by Shri Prem Singh Dhumal, Chief Minister of . Daughter of Shri Desraj Mahajan, former Speaker of Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly and former Cabinet Minister, Devi Cherian is also Patron of Dipalaya, an orphanage for physically handicapped and orphan children in Delhi. (Navbharat Times, New Delhi dated February 24, 2012) India’s youngest and most vibrant newspaper, Mail Today, which was launched four-and-a-half years ago in Delhi and has since registered its presence in Chandigarh, now arrives in London. Providing news for the new Indian in the United Kingdom, Mail Today— a joint venture between the Daily Mail of London and the prestigious India Today Group of India – now enlarges its foot-print. Targeting the large south Asian population in London, Mail Today wants to connect with the diaspora by bringing the best of Indian news packaged in a modern avatar. (Mail Today, New Delhi dated March 5, 2012) Tusha Mittal of news magazine Tehelka was on March 13, 2012 honoured with the prestigious Chameli Devi award as Outstanding Woman Mediaperson at New Delhi. The awards jury was impressed by her reports on the lives of people trapped in Naxal conflict zones or villagers in crossfire between cadres of political parties in West Bengal.(The Indian Express, New Delhi dated March 14, 2012)

Historian, author and leading journalist of , Rajendra Shankar Bhatt passed away on March 19, 2012. Also a pioneer in the field of public relations, Mr. Bhatt had been the Press Advisor to the late Harideo Joshi during the latter’s two tenures as Chief Minister of the State in the eighties. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated March 20, 2012)

59 Britain’s Press Awards on March 20, 2012 night honoured the Daily Mail as the Newspaper of the Year and its website, Mail Online, was awarded the Website of the Year. The Guardian, which made news with its series of stories last year on phone-hacking, claimed the award for Scoop of the Year for its story, “Milly Dowler Phone Hacked”. This story ultimately led to the closure of the News of the World tabloid and put the focus on media practices in Britain. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated March 22, 2012)

World Media in Indian Press

United States of America

What began as steamy gossip about an affair between a famous British soccer player and a reality TV star has quickly become another test over how far the rights to privacy and free speech extend online, where social media operate in countries with vastly different laws. The soccer player has been granted a so-called super-injunction, a stringent and controversial British legal measure that prevents media outlets from identifying him, reporting on the story or even from revealing the existence of the court order itself. But tens of thousands of Internet users have flouted the injunction by revealing his name on , Facebook and online soccer forums, sites that blur the definition of the press and are virtually impossible to the police. Last week, amid growing outrage in Britain over the use of super- injunctions, the athlete obtained a court order in British High Court demanding that Twitter reveal the identities of the anonymous users who had posted the messages. A Twitter spokesman, Matt Graves, said the company could not comment on the court order or how it planned to respond. Eric Goldman, Director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University, said, “It’s really going to the core of Twitter’s service and trying to balance the speech of its users and the fact that countries have different laws and norms about speech.” And while a debate centering on an athlete’s love life might not seem to be the most pressing example of free speech online, there are broader and more urgent implications, analysts said. “If you step back, that same sort of protection is really vital to have in place when you’re talking about the individuals involved in a revolution or a social movement like the Arab Spring,” said Thomas R. Burke, a Chairman of The Media Law Practice at the firm Davis Wright Tremaine.

60 In a company blog post in January, Biz Stone, a Twitter founder, and Alex Macgillivray, its general counsel, wrote, “Our position on freedom of expression carries with it a mandate to protect our users’ right to speak freely and preserve their ability to contest having their private information revealed.” Twitter removes spam and illegal posts, they wrote, but tries to limit those exceptions. It releases information when required by law but notifies users before the disclosures unless it is legally prohibited from doing so. Because Twitter is based in the US, it could argue that it abides by the law and that any plaintiff would need to try the case in the US, legal analysts said. But Twitter is opening a London office, and the rules are more complicated if companies have employees or offices in foreign countries. Still, Twitter has resisted turning over this type of information in the past. Mr. Macgillivray, when asked about international laws at a conference in March, said, “We tell them, we’re a US company, we have CDA 230 here, and you’re welcome to come and try your hand at suing us here,” referring to the Communications Decency Act, which says Web companies are not liable for what their users post. There is no question that the Twitter posts about the soccer player would be considered legal in the United States, Internet law experts said, because of the Communications Decency Act and the First Amendment’s protections for anonymous speech. Further, an injunction to prevent this type of information from being exposed would be unheard of in the US. But the issue gets murkier across borders. “You would think at this point in the Internet you would have a clear body of law about what laws the Internet is subject to, but that is anything but clear,” Mr. Burke said. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated May 24, 2011) The New York Times broke with its 160-year history on June 1, 2011 when it appointed, for the first time ever, a woman Executive Editor, Jill Abramson. Ms. Abramson is currently the Managing Editor of the venerable voice of liberal America and in her new role will step into the shoes of the renowned Bill Keller. Mr. Keller, the NYT announced, will “become a full-time writer for the paper” after he hands over the top job to Ms. Abramson in September. Mr. Keller steps down from his role after seeing the newspaper scoop up 18 Pulitzer prizes and boosting its online audience size to nearly 50 million readers worldwide. In the face of the economic downturn and the inexorable drift of readers and advertising to online editions, Mr. Keller was said to have proposed more

61 “rigorous editing” and promised an ongoing commitment to “hard-hitting ground- breaking journalism”. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated June 4, 2011) Four of the five largest US tobacco companies sued the Food and Drug Administration, over new graphic cigarette labels including the sewn-up corpse of a smoker and a picture of diseased lungs, saying the warnings violate their free speech rights and will cost millions to print. The companies, led by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Lorillard Tobacco Co., said the warnings no longer simply convey facts to allow people to make a decision whether to smoke. They instead force them to put government anti- smoking advocacy more prominently on their packs than their own brands, the firms said. “Never before in the US have producers of a lawful product been required to use their own packaging and advertising to convey an emotionally— charged government message urging adult consumers to shun their products,” the firms wrote in the lawsuit filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. The FDA refused to comment, saying the agency does not discuss pending litigation. The FDA approved nine new warnings to rotate on cigarette packs. They will be printed on the entire top half, front and back, of the packaging. The new warnings also must constitute 20 per cent of any cigarette advertising. One warning label is a picture of a corpse with its chest sewed up and the words: “Smoking can kill you.” Another label has a picture of a healthy pair of lungs beside a yellow and black pair with a warning that smoking causes fatal lung disease. The lawsuit said the images were manipulated to be especially emotional. The tobacco companies said the corpse photo is actually an actor with a fake scar, while the healthy lungs were sanitised to make the diseased organ look worse. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated August 18, 2011)

As part of expanding its global reach, the New York Times has launched ‘India Ink’, an English-language website offering news and analysis about Indian politics, culture, business, sports and lifestyle. The site, which is the New York Times first-ever country-specific site for news and information, provides a distinct perspective on news and events that matter most to Indians and those who follow news about India, both on the subcontinent and abroad, said the paper.

62 “India is a vibrant country with a wealth of urgent news and compelling stories. India Ink is an exciting expansion of The Times’s global reach”, said The New York Times Executive Editor, Jill Abramson.

“Expanded coverage of India is a natural fit for The New York Times and its Global Edition, the International Herald Tribune said Stephen Dunbar— Johnson publisher of the International Herald Tribune. “We are delighted to better serve our readers and advertisers in India and abroad who care deeply about news in the region”. India Ink is edited by The New York Times in India and the International Herald Tribune in Hong-Kong, led by lead writer Heather Timmons, who has covered business in India for The New York Times for the last four years. It would feature contributions from New York Times journalists as well as from top writers in India and the Indian diaspora. “We will be reporting from the Ram Lila grounds in Delhi to the boardrooms of Silicon Valley, tracking the triumphs and frustrations of daily desi life and the changes sweeping the nation.

“As we do, we plan to collaborate with readers in new ways, spark new debates and re-think old ones — all while producing more of the high-quality news that The New York Times is known for”, it added. With an expanded team in India, India Ink will provide on—the ground coverage of the world’s biggest democracy — and of a people who know that “no matter how far they roam, their hearts will always be Indian”, said NYT. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated September 14, 2011)

Asserting that freedom of expression applies equally to the internet as it does in the real world, the United States has said that it is in talks with Indian government over the regulatory mechanism on Internet. “We believe that freedom of expression applies equally to the internet as it does in the real world”, the US State Department Spokesman, Mark Toner told reporters when asked about the efforts of the Indian government to regulate or monitor content postings on the internet and social networking websites such as Facebook. The US State Department Spokesperson, however, clarified twice that its position on internet freedom is not necessarily India specific, but in general globally. “We are concerned about any effort to curtail freedom of expression net, “Toner said.

63 Union Telecom Minister, Kapil Sibbal had said that the government has asked companies, including Google and Facebook, to block offensive material, especially content that could hurt religious sentiments. With India, Toner acknowledged that it is indeed one of the topics of discussion with the Indian government and is part of the strategic dialogue. “In terms of India, we do have a working group on information and communication technology between the US and India, and it’s part of our overall strategic dialogue. “Of course, within that working group, we do talk about issues on information technology, discuss approaches our governments can take to create investment for example, of regulatory environments that maximize the development of these sectors”, the spokesman said. (The Times of India, New Delhi dated December 9, 2011) The number of jailed reporters has hit a 15-year high, with Iran, Eritrea and China holding the most, according to a report released on December 8, 2011 by the Committee to Protect Journalists. The New York-based Rights Group said 179 writers, editors and photojournalists were in jail as of December 1- up 34 from 2010. Nearly half of those jailed were online reporters and 45% of them freelancers. (The Hindustan Times, New Delhi dated December 9, 2011) India-Origin journalist Davan Maharaj has been named the new Editor and Executive Vice President of the Los Angeles Times in succession to Russ Stanton, who led the paper to three Pulitzer Prizes, the paper announced. The 49 year old Trinidad-born Maharaj takes over as the 15th editor of the paper and is currently the Managing Editor. (Deccan Chronicle, Hyderabad dated December 15, 2011) The New York Times Co. is in advanced talks to sell all of its small, regional publications. The company said Halifax Media Holdings, owner of the Daytona Beach News-Journal in Florida, is preparing to purchase the Times’ Regional Media Group Division. The unit consists of 16 regional newspapers. Financial details of the transaction were not disclosed. The New York Times, The Boston Globe, The International Herald Tribune and the About Group are not part of the sale.(The Hindustan Times, New Delhi dated December 21, 2011) For the second consecutive year, has been identified as the most dangerous country for journalists with the killing of seven scribes there in 2011 out of a total of 43 murdered worldwide. The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said, in the past five years 29 journalists have been killed in Pakistan in relation to their work.

64 “The CPJ research shows Pakistan to be among the worst countries in the world in bringing the killers of journalists to justice”, the body said in its year- end report. “The best known case in Pakistan this year involved Saleem Shahzad, a reporter for Asia Times online who died in May after writing a report which alleged that Al-Qaeda had infiltrated Pakistan Navy”, the CPJ said. CPJ’s report comes amid a probe by a Pakistani judicial commission in the death of the journalist. The journalists’ organization quoting Human Rights Watch said Shahzad had complained of receiving threats from Pakistan’s ISI before his death and added that the case remains unsolved. The CPJ annual report pinpointed Mexico as another country with an “atrocious record” of treatment of journalists, saying that three reporters had been killed in the country, most of them after taking on its powerful and ruthless drug mafia. The report said that the Arab Spring revolution across the Middle East and North Africa has also led to first cases of journalists’ death in Syria and Tunisia. It also noted that there were no deaths of journalists in India this year. The CPJ executive director summarized that the year 2011 was one of the most “exacting” for journalists with political conflict and unrest proving deadly. (The Pioneer, New Delhi dated December 22, 2011) At least 46 journalists were killed across the globe in 2011 and Pakistan continues to be the most deadly country for the second year in running, a rights group has said. Pakistan reported seven deaths followed by five each in Iraq and Libya while attacks have continued in Iraq despite the U.S. withdrawal, Libya witnessed intense fighting following a revolt against strongman Muammar Qadhafi. The figures were brought out by New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists. “Seventeen journalists died while on dangerous assignments, many of them while covering the chaotic and violent confrontations between authorities and protesters during the uprisings that swept the Arab world”, the report said. The group also reported an increase in the deaths of Internet journalists, who “rarely appeared on CPJ’s death toll before 2008". CPJ said it was still investigating another 35 deaths in 2011 that may have been work- related. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated February 22, 2012)

65 United Kingdom Take the common-law principles of fairness, add a dash of European Human-Rights Legislation, a lucrative tabloid trade in kiss-and-tell stories, an ineffective press watchdog, a touch of angst about secret justice and a technology that makes everyone into a publisher, and what do you get? The mess of Britain’s privacy laws, now under sweeping review by a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament. The latest and most spectacular episode involves a married footballer, Ryan Giggs of Manchester United, who went to court to stop news organisations reporting on his alleged affair with a woman who, a judge said, may have been trying to blackmail him (she denies this). Mr. Giggs gained the remedy he sought, but not the result: his private life became a public scandal, with his name featuring in fans’ catcalls in the stadium, used as a catchphrase on talk- shows, broadcast by 75,000 Twitter users and ultimately, on May 23, mentioned in the House of Commons by a Liberal Democrat MP, John Hemming. Ordering the parliamentary inquiry, the Prime Minister, David Cameron, said the situation was “unsustainable”. Few would disagree. Britain, unlike France, does not have a formal privacy law. The European Convention of Human Rights, incorporated into national law in 1998, made things messier by enshrining two clashing principles: a strong defence of freedom of speech, and a more qualified right to the “respect of private life”. Judges (as Parliament requested them) have been chewing over that ever since, issuing closely reasoned rulings that also reflect the Press Complaints Commission’s definition of public- interest journalism. For example, the courts ruled that the Daily Mirror was justified in 2001 in printing most parts of a story of a model, Naomi Campbell, visiting a drug-rehabilitation clinic (because it exposed her as a hypocrite), but not the accompanying pictures (which intruded on her privacy). Punishing those who gratuitously destroy privacy is one thing - and features in legal systems all over the world. Penalties for those who identify rape victims, for example, are usually severe. The real problem comes when judges try to protect privacy by stopping newspapers from breaching it in the first place. The argument is a strong one: that a breach of privacy causes irreversible harm. In libel cases, untruthful damage to a reputation can be restored by an apology and damages; but once embarrassing private information has been disclosed, it stays public, no matter how the leaker is punished. However, the practical difficulties of protecting court ordered privacy are increasingly daunting.

66 Anonymity orders are often issued against newspapers a few hours before publication as an interim measure pending a full hearing. That may keep the offending material from appearing explicitly in the mainstream media. But it does not prevent coyly coded references to a story appearing – which can be glaringly obvious to those in the know. And it does not stop a story – or perhaps exaggerated or incorrect versions of it – appearing on blogs, Twitter and Facebook. Tracing the identities of those who post such illicit material on social- networking sites, mostly based overseas, may prove impossible. Once the news is out on the internet, Britain’s fiercely competitive tabloids become frenzied in their attempts to reveal the full story first. In Mr. Giggs’s case, the big breach came when a Scottish paper, The Sunday Herald, ignored the injunction issued by the London court. This is a legal grey area: Scotland has its own legal system, and prudent lawyers usually make sure that they apply for an “interdict” there to match any injunction obtained elsewhere. Mr. Giggs’s did not. The courts’ inability to stem the tide of technological tittle-tattle risks eroding the authority of the whole legal system. But secrecy corrodes it too. Some anonymity orders in recent years have been accompanied by such drastic restrictions that even their existence may not be reported: these are the so-called “super injunctions” which, though rare, epitomize to many the problems in the current set up. The same worries surround secrecy in family- law cases. Some MPs feel that judges have got too big for their wigs – for example, by becoming too fond of ordering litigants to talk to nobody about the case. This raises deep questions. When one kind of supremacy – of a court order – clashes with the sovereignty of Parliament, Britain’s unwritten constitution is frustratingly fuzzy. Mr. Hemming’s remark came in flat defiance of two senior judges who had considered and rejected applications to lift Mr. Giggs’s injunction, in the light of careful legal arguments and their own expertise. Mr. Hemming’s party leader, Nick Clegg, rebuked him, saying that MPs who dislike the law should “change it not flout it”. It is unclear who might punish him, or how. Diagnosing the problem is one thing, solving it is another. Mark Stephens, a media lawyer, argues that tabloid stories are soon forgotten if not accompanied by a legal kerfuffle. “You take it on the chin and it’s tomorrow’s fish-and-chip paper,” the counsels (although betrayed spouses may not be so sanguine). In other words, treat privacy like libel, with penalties and remedies available only after publication.

67 Such an approach could be accompanied by a beefed-up version of the now-voluntary Press Complaints Commission, with statutory powers to protect privacy and punish newspapers that breach it, and tighter definitions of “the public interest” and of who counts as a “public figure”. Tabloid editors would not like this, or a formal privacy law if it were similarly restrictive. Many, not just self-serving tabloids, fear that such a law would be twisted by the rich, powerful and well-lawyered to conceal their misdeeds. Yet the idea of the press taking Twitter as its benchmark of newsworthiness seems equally distasteful. Privacy law, like the lives it sets out to protect, is a messy business. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated June 3, 2011) The use of a private investigator by a Rupert Murdoch-owned daily to hack into phones for information has snowballed into a major crisis for British tabloid journalism with Prime Minister, David Cameron on July 6, 2011 promising a public inquiry into the sordid affair. New revelations that the News of the World tabloid commissioned private investigators to access messages left in phones of celebrities has raised fresh questions about sensationalism in Britain’s tabloid press. People whose phones were allegedly hacked include Prince William, victims of the July 7 London bombings, and victims of crime such as murdered teenager Milly Dowler, whose case was widely covered in the news media. Calling the incident “disgusting”, Prime Minister, Cameron has called for a probe into the scandal. “We do need to have an inquiry, possibly inquiries, into what has happened. We are no longer talking here about politicians and celebrities, we are talking about murder victims, potential terrorist victims, having their phones hacked into,” a visibly enraged Cameron said in the House of Commons on July 6, 2011. “It is absolutely disgusting, what has taken place, and I think everyone in this House and indeed this country will be revolted by what they have heard and what they have seen on their television screens,” he added. When reports of phone hacking allegedly indulged in by the News of the World appeared earlier this year, a statement was issued by Rupert Murdoch’s company apologising unreservedly to those whose cases met “specific criteria”. However, Murdoch’s News International now faces renewed heat with new revelations that the victims of phone hacking included politicians, celebrities and also victims of crime.

68 , Chief Executive of News International, who was the Editor of News of the World when the alleged hacking took place, is reported to have been “deeply shocked” at the revelations amidst calls from politicians asking for her resignation. (The Pioneer, New Delhi dated July 7, 2011) Rupert Murdoch’s British tabloid News of the World which has been at the centre of a storm over allegations of widespread illegal phone hacking is to close down, it was announced on July 7, 2011 amid growing public outrage over its newsgathering tactics. In a statement, , Chairman of News International which publishes NoW, The Times and , said the forthcoming Sunday issue of the 168-year-old newspaper would be its last. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated July 8, 2011) Rebekah Brooks, Former Chief Executive of Rupert Murdoch’s British media group News International and a family friend of the Murdochs, became the most high-profile figure to be arrested in connection with investigations into the phone hacking scandal. Her spokesman said she was arrested when she went to the police station for a “pre-arranged interview with the police.” Ms. Brooks’ surprise arrest on suspicion of conspiring to intercept communications and corruption allegations came amid reports that several other senior News International executives, including Mr. Murdoch and his son and company Chairman, James, were being investigated for any alleged role in covering up the scale of the scandal. Ms. Brooks, who resigned following intense public and political pressure, was to appear before the House of Commons’ Media Committee to answer questions about her role in the scandal. That may not happen now because her testimony could be used by the police against her. It could also prejudice police investigations. “The arrest puts her in a difficult position in terms of her scheduled appearance at the meeting,” her spokesman said. Ms. Brooks was the Editor of the News of the World during the period to which many allegations of phone hacking relate. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated July 18, 2011) Amid high drama that included an attempt by a comedian to attack him with a plastic plate loaded with shaving foam, Rupert Murdoch told MPs that until recently he had no knowledge of the phone hacking scandal at the News of the World (NoW) and was let down by “people I trusted.”

69 ‘Shocked, ashamed’ Earlier in his testimony, Mr. Murdoch said he was “absolutely shocked, appalled and ashamed” that NoW journalists had been involved in hacking the phone of the murdered schoolgirl, Milly Dowler. This was also the line taken by his son James Murdoch, Chairman of his British media group News International, and its Former Chief Executive, Rebekah Brooks, who said the first time she heard that Milly Dowler’s phone was hacked was two weeks ago. All three offered profuse apologies for what happened and described NoW’s actions as “shameful” and “inexcusable” but denied that there was any cover-up. Ms. Brooks, who was NoW’s Editor during the period to which many of the hacking allegations relate, acknowledged that the newspaper used private detectives to dig up stories but claimed at the time it was a “common practice in Fleet Street.” She also admitted that payments were made to police for information but said she never personally made any payments and was not aware of any specific payments. Mr. Murdoch said he got to know about the practices at NoW only earlier this year when News International discovered new evidence and started investigating. Was he “misled” about what was going on in his company? Mr. Murdoch was asked. “Clearly, yes,” he said. In reply to a pointed question whether he felt responsible for the “fiasco,” he said: “No.” Mr. Murdoch argued that he ran a global business of 53,000 people and NoW was “just 1%” of this and that was perhaps a reason why “I lost sight of it.” Asked who he thought was responsible for what went on at NoW, he said: “The people I trusted to run it and may be the people they trusted.” Apologies James repeatedly apologised to the victims of phone hacking. He said the company failed to live up to “the standards they aspired to” and was “determined to put things right and make sure they do not happen again.”

70 Both Rupert and James said there was no evidence that phones of victims of 9/11 were hacked. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated July 20, 2011) The News of the World phone-hacking scandal, pushed out of the front pages in the wake of the London riots, was back in the news after the House of Commons Media Committee investigating it released an explosive letter from a former NoW journalist claiming the practice was “widely discussed” at editorial meetings and senior figures knew about it. The claim by who was sacked after being jailed in 2007 for hacking into the phones of the royal family, blows a hole in the official NoW version that it was confined to Mr. Goodman who it described as a “rogue” reporter. He wrote the letter to his employers appealing against his dismissal. “This practice was widely discussed in the daily editorial conference, until explicit reference to it was banned by the Editor,” he wrote calling his dismissal unfair. Embarrassing The letter is also politically embarrassing for Prime Minister, David Cameron as it claims his former Communications Chief, , who was Editor of NoW at the time, offered to let Mr. Goodman keep his job if he agreed not to implicate the paper. Mr. Coulson was hired by Mr. Cameron after he quit NoW over the Goodman case. He has denied any knowledge of hacking under his watch. The 160-year-old tabloid, owned by Rupert Murdoch and published by News International headed by his son James, was shut down last month following fresh allegations. Tom Watson, Labour Member of the Commons Committee, described the letter as “the most significant piece of evidence that has been revealed so far”. “It completely removes News International’s defence. This is one of the largest cover-ups I have seen in my lifetime,” he said. Mr. Goodman’s assertion echoes that of the former NoW Editor, , and the company’s former Legal Manager, , that senior News International executives, including Mr. James Murdoch, knew what was going on. In his evidence before the Committee last month, Mr. Murdoch denied any knowledge of hacking. The Committee is likely to recall him amid concerns that he may have “misled” MPs. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated August 17, 2011)

71 News Corp funded the former editor of the News of the World tabloid when he worked for David Cameron in opposition, the BBC said, in new evidence of the close links between Prime Minister and Rupert Murdoch. The Labour opposition has repeatedly questioned Cameron’s judgment in hiring Andy Coulson as his spokesman in 2007, shortly after the editor quit over the jailing of his royal reporter for phone hacking. Allegations now that Coulson maintained financial links to the owner of the influential Sun and Times newspapers is likely to cause further damage. The BBC said Coulson, who was arrested earlier this year on suspicion of being involved in phone hacking, received several hundred thousand pounds from News International, the British newspaper arm of the News Corp media empire, as part of a severance package that ran in installments until the end of 2007. He also received benefits such as healthcare for three years and kept his company car, the BBC said, quoting sources. Cameron’s right of center Conservative party has long been criticized for being too close to Murdoch. A spokesman for the Conservative Party said senior party officials had not known about the severance arrangements. Downing Street declined to comment. Opposition Labor called for transparency on the issue. David Cameron needs to say whether he knew about the payments to Andy Coulson, said Ivan Lewis, Labor’s culture affairs spokesman. Coulson was specifically asked during a Parliamentary Committee hearing in 2009 whether he had received any other income when he worked for the Conservative Party, and said no. Coulson quit his government job earlier this year when police further investigated the hacking allegations. He has since been arrested by police and is facing questions over what he knew about the phone hacking, which was used to secure stories. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated August 24, 2011) American-Australian media magnate Rupert Murdoch’s company News International has been hit by new lawsuits as new allegations about the victims of the phone-hacking scandal emerge. Former News of the World editor, Andy Coulson is suing News Group Newspapers, the publishing arm of News International, over lack of payment for his legal fees, “We can confirm that proceedings have been issued,” law firm DLA Piper, which represents Mr. Coulson, said.

72 The news of legal action by Mr. Coulson comes just as the lawyer of murdered school girl Milly Dowler’s family said that he plans to take legal action against main Murdoch holding company, News Corp, in the US. British lawyer Mark Lewis, who represents the Dowler family, has confirmed that he is consulting with lawyers in the US about taking legal action against News Corp. “The action will be looking at News Corp’s liability for action as far as its subsidiaries. It will raise issues of corporate governance,” Mr. Lewis said. News International is holding negotiations for compensation payment with the Dowlers, with reports pointing out that a package of £3 million, including a £1 million donation, is being finalised. In a more damning revelation, it has been alleged that , the former Deputy Editor of News of the World who had been employed by the Met Police for a short period, was paid more than £25,000 by News International while working at Scotland Yard. The Daily Telegraph has claimed that Scotland Yard records show that Wallis, who was arrested over hacking claims, was paid for providing News International with details of a suspected assassination attempt on the Pope during his visit to the UK last year. New hacking allegations emerged against the News of the World with British celebrity Jade Goody’s former agent and PR consultant Max Clifford saying that Goody, who died of cervical cancer in 2009, believed that her phone was being hacked. He said Goody had told him “she was convinced her phone messages were being listened to and intercepted.” The Met Police, however, did not comment on the allegation. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated September 25, 2011) British lawmakers said they will grill James Murdoch about phone hacking at the now-defunct tabloid News of the World for a second time on November 10. Meanwhile, , former publisher of the Murdoch owned Wall Street Journal, testified before a House panel and said he had no idea hacking was rife when he approved a quarter of a million pound payment to Clive Goodman, the News of the World reporter jailed in 2007 for hacking. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated October 25, 2011) UK Police has widened its probe into the phone-hacking scandal to the most prestigious of Rupert Murdoch’s UK papers, The Times, a top Labour MP said on February 2, 2012. The Times is facing allegations of e-mail-hacking. Labour MP Tom Watson said the police had confirmed to him that The Times was also being investigated for allegations of computer hacking. (The Pioneer, New Delhi dated February 3, 2012)

73 In an explosive revelation on February 14, 2012 The Times newspaper has revealed that News Corp, the parent company of Murdoch owned News International in the UK, has disclosed details and identities of some of The Sun journalists to Scotland Yard. News Corp’s Management and Standards Committee, which is conducting an internal probe into the phone-hacking and the issue of illegal payments to the police and public officials by News of the World and Sun journalists, disclosed the identity of the sources as “there is evidence” that they may have been paid for the information. The Committee was instructed by News Corp to cooperate fully with police and it is searching millions of e-mails, expenses claims, payments records and other documents for any evidence that public officials may have been paid for information by journalists at News International, which also publishes”, The Times said, adding that the Committee is also planning to investigate Times and Sunday Times. The identification of the confidential sources led to three arrests of a police officer, a Defence Ministry employee and an armed forces officer. “It is not clear whether the MSC identified the sources without considering whether the publication of stories based on their information was in the public interest”, the report said. The revelation comes after The Sun’s associate editor Trevor Kavanagh criticised the police investigation and arrests of Sun journalists in the inquiry. The Met police was quick to defend its investigation and the arrests. “The linked Operations Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta are extremely difficult and complex with literally millions of pieces of documentation needing to be scrutinised and examined. Given the seriousness of the allegations currently under investigation and the significant number of victims, the MPs does not believe that the level of resources devoted to the three inquiries is in any way disproportionate to the enormous task in hand”, Scotland Yard said after Kavanagh critcised the police for its “disproportionate” targeting of Sun journalists. “There are 169 officers and staff currently deployed to the three linked investigations. Of these, 91 officers and staff are deployed to ; 61 to ; and 16 to Operation Tuleta with a Detective Chief Superintendent overseeing the three investigations. These resources are constantly reviewed and where they relate to corrupt payments to police officers the IPCC have oversight”, the Met police said. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated February 15, 2012) Cherie Blair, wife of former Prime Minister, Tony Blair became the latest in a long list of high-profile figures to sue Rupert Murdoch’s media group, News International, claiming that her phone was hacked by the News of the World.

74 She is also suing , a private detective jailed in 2007 for intercepting voicemails of members of the royal family for NoW. Ms. Blair’s lawyer, Graham Atkins, said in a statement: “I can confirm that we have issued a claim on behalf of Cherie Blair in relation to the unlawful interception of her voicemails”. The move will embarrass Mr. Murdoch given his close relations with the Blairs in the past. Mr. Blair, who cultivated Mr. Murdoch heavily to win his newspapers’ support, is godfather to Mr. Murdoch’s youngest daughter, Chloe. It is also likely to cast shadow over the News International’s planned launch of a new paper — The Sun — to replace NoW, which Mr. Murdoch shut down last summer in a bid to draw a line under the hacking scandal. During Mr. Blair’s Prime Ministership, the NoW published a number of stories about the Blair’s private life. At the time it was suspected that someone from inside Downing Street, including Ms. Bair’s style guru Carole Caplin, might be leaking information but that view changed after the hacking scandal erupted. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated February 24, 2012) News International has been accused of deleting e-mails linked to phone- hacking, according to documents released by the High Court in London. Justice Vos, who is hearing civil claims by hacking victims, released the documents to the media after an application by The Daily Telegraph and the details from the claims filed by victims of phone-hacking for damages were also published in The Guardian, the BBC and The Times. The documents released by the High Court have evidence that senior News International executives were allegedly involved in a deliberate attempt to destroy evidence. The documents also revealed that private investigator Glenn Mulcaire had hacked phones 2,226 times for News of the World, the now defunct tabloid at the heart of the scandal. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated February 26, 2012) The Lazarus newspaper is rising from the dead. Only seven months after the News of the World was closed following revelations of extensive voice-mail hacking, the Sun on February 26, 2012 is expected to launch on February 26, 2012. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated February 27, 2012) British newspapers from 19th century are now available online for the first time as British Library has started digitising its newspaper archives. Upto four million pages are available for online viewing at present and the archive will ultimately contain papers from 1700 to 1950, making it a treasure trove of 250 years of historical newspapers. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated November 30, 2011)

75 British journalism on February 2, 2012 lost one of its most respected war reporters when Marie Colvin of , often spoken of in the same breath as Martha Gelhorn for her extraordinary courage to venture into the most feared of danger zones and her passion for war victims, was killed with a French photographer Remi Ochlik in Syria. With her trademark black eye-patch that she wore since losing her left eye in a grenade attack while covering the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka in 2001, Ms. Colvin was regarded as the finest foreign correspondent of her generation in the British media. She had reported from almost every hot spot and won respect especially for the compassion with which she wrote about war victims. “Marie was an extraordinary figure in the life of The Sunday Times, driven by a passion to cover wars in the belief that what she did mattered. She believed profoundly that reporting could curtail the excesses of brutal regimes and make the international community take notice”, said The Sunday Times Editor John Witherow. Ms. Colvin, who was in her 50s had been its foreign correspondent for more than two decades and won many awards for her frontline despatches, especially from West Asia. In Parliament, Prime Minister David Cameron said Ms. Colvin’s death was “a desperately sad reminder of the risks that journalists take to inform the world of what is happening and the dreadful events in Syria.” At least two other foreign journalists were reported wounded —— a British freelance photographer Paul Conroy, who was working with Ms. Colvin, and Edith Bouvier of the French newspaper, Le Figaro. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated February 23, 2012)

France A widening phone-hacking scandal is prompting a broad reassessment of the balance between press freedom and privacy in Britain, even as France grapples with the consequences of its tradition of protecting the powerful. If Dominique Strauss-Kahn walks free now that the sexual assault case against him in New York seems to be weakening, will the French public have a right, or, indeed, an appetite to know more than what emerged in US courts? And if less-exalted people in Britain feel that their secrets should be protected too, how should they shield themselves from journalists hacking into their voice mails?

76 The questions underscore the contrasts between cultures that, in the past, have made Britain a temple to strident disclosure and France a whispered haven of discretion. In both countries, the debate has reached what might, at first, seem like a tipping point. In London, tabloid newspaper, News of the World, was accused of eavesdropping on the cellphones of a kidnapped and murdered schoolgirl, the relatives of people who died in the 2005 London transit bombings and possibly the families of British war dead. Such was the public revulsion that an embattled Prime Minister, David Cameron, was forced to order two separate inquiries — one into the phonehacking scandal itself and the other into the behaviour of the freewheeling British press. In a news conference, Cameron insisted that the British press tradition of self-regulation had failed. “I believe we need a new system entirely,” he said, prompting an outcry from British journalists who have long resisted statutory restrictions on their freedoms. Yet, the broad rules remain freighted with ambiguity, governed by two apparently conflicting clauses of the European Convention on Human Rights: one endorses the right to privacy, another the right to free expression. France — like much of Continental Europe — has long chosen a different, less swashbuckling attitude towards matters of privacy, offering the powerful a degree of protection that would be unthinkable in Britain or the US. French politicians have been able to hide behind some of Europe’s tightest privacy laws. The sexual reputation of Strauss-Kahn, for instance, was known to many journalists but rarely publicised. The extent of that knowledge emerged only when he was arrested in New York and charged with trying to rape a hotel housekeeper at the Sofitel in Manhattan. In France and Britain, the past weeks have shown both models of reporting to be strained to the point of failure, leaving journalists to define the role they ought to play. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated July 11, 2011) France’s Prime Minister condemned an apparent arson attack early on November 2, 2011 that destroyed the offices of a satirical French newspaper that had “invited” the Prophet Muhammad as a guest editor this week. A police official said the blaze broke out overnight at the offices of Charlie Hebdo weekly, and the exact cause remains unclear. No injuries were reported. French Prime Minister, François Fillon called on the authorities to find those responsible and bring them to justice. “Freedom of expression is an

77 inalienable value of our democracy…No cause can justify a violent action”, Fillon said in a statement. The front-page of the weekly, subtitled Sharia Hebdo, a reference to Islamic law, apparently depicted the Prophet. Newspaper cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad published in 2005 by a Danish newspaper triggered protests in Muslim countries. The President of an umbrella group representing France’s Muslim community, at some five million the largest in Western Europe, also condemned the apparent attack. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated November 3, 2011) The weekly Charlie Hebdo whose office was fire bombed after it printed a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad has reproduced the image with other caricatures in a supplement with one of the country’s leading newspapers. It defended the “freedom to poke fun” in the four-page supplement, wrapped around copies of the left-wing daily Liberation on November 3, 2011 a day after an arson attack gutted the Paris headquarters of Charlie Hebdo. (The Indian Express, New Delhi dated November 4, 2011) Reporters Without Borders has prepared a list of 10 most dangerous areas in the world for journalists including Kahira capital of Misra, Misrata of Libya and Baluchistan of Pakistan. While showing Misra and Libya as most dangerous areas for journalists has informed that 66 journalists were murdered in the year and more than 1,000 were arrested in the year. (Dainik Jagran, New Delhi dated December 23, 2011)

Geneva At least 106 journalists were killed in 2011, among them 20 who reported on the Arab spring uprisings, a group said. (The Hindustan Times, New Delhi dated December 21, 2011)

Vienna Giving a call for ensuring freedom of press in West Asia, the World Newspaper Congress and World Editors Forum have cautioned that people’s aspirations for freedom will come out through “unanticipated” channels if traditional media is curtailed. President of global media organisation WAN-INFRA, Jacob Mathew said the changes taking place in the Arab world prove that if traditional media are put under tethers, aspirations for freedom would get expressed through unanticipated channels. “The media is undergoing rapid changes in the tablet age. The media should make use of all possibilities of the digital world to gather news.

78 Newspapers which have the strength to face the challenges of the technological revolution would continue to be relevant,” said Mr. Mathew. The two global organisations said media should make use of all possibilities of the digital world to gather news. Mr. Mathew said people had more trust in newspapers than in any other news media. “Even today, 180 crore people are connected to the world of news through newspapers. This is 20 per cent more than the consumers of internet,” he said. The WAN-INFRA also presented its ‘Golden Pen of Freedom Award— 2011’ to Dawit Isaak, who has been in jail since 10 years in Eritrea. His brother Esayas collected the award on his behalf. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated October 16, 2011)

Madrid All 90 people wanted information deleted from the Web. Among them was a victim of domestic violence who discovered that her address could easily be found through Google. Another, well into middle age now, thought it was unfair that a few computer key strokes could unearth an account of her arrest in her college days. They might not have received much of a hearing in the United States, where Google is based. But here, as elsewhere in Europe, an idea has taken hold – individuals should have a “right to be forgotten” on the Web. Spain’s government is now championing this cause. It has ordered Google to stop indexing information about 90 citizens who filed formal complaints with its Data Protection Agency. The case is now in court and being watched closely across Europe for how it might affect the control citizens will have over information they posted, or which was posted about them, on the Web. Whatever the ruling in the Spanish case, the European Union is also expected to weigh in with new “right to be forgotten” regulations this fall, Viviane Reding, the European Union’s Justice Commissioner has offered few details of what she has in mind. But she has made clear she is determined to give privacy watchdogs greater power. “I cannot accept that individuals have no say over their data once it has been launched into cyberspace,” she said in July. She said she had heard the argument that more control was impossible, and that Europeans should “get over it.”

79 But, Ms. Reding said, “I don’t agree.” On this issue, experts say, Europe and the United States have largely parted company. “What you really have here is a trans-Atlantic clash,” said Franz Werro, who was born and raised in Switzerland and is now a law professor at Georgetown University. “The two cultures really aren’t going in the same direction when it comes to privacy rights.” For instance, in the United States, Mr. Werro said, courts have consistently found that the right to publish the truth about someone’s past supersedes any right to privacy. Europeans, he said, see things differently: “In Europe you don’t have the right to say anything about anybody, even if it is true.” Mr. Werro says Europe sees the need to balance freedom of speech and the right to know against a person’s right to privacy or dignity, concepts often enshrined in European laws. The European perspective was shaped by the way information was collected and used against individuals under dictators like, Franco and Hitler and under Communism, Government agencies routinely compiled dossiers on citizens as a means of control. Court cases over these issues have popped up in many corners of Europe. In Germany, for instance, Wolfgang Werle and Manfred Lauber, who became infamous for killing a German actor in 1990, are suing Wikipedia to drop the entry about them. German privacy laws allow suppression of criminal identities in news accounts once people have paid their debt to society. The lawyer for the two killers argues that criminals have a right to privacy too, and a right to be left alone. Google has also faced suits in several countries, including Germany, Switzerland and the Czech Republic, over its efforts to collect street-by-street photographs for its Street View feature. In Germany, where courts found that Street View was legal, Google allowed individuals and businesses to opt out, and about 250,000 have. The issue, however, has had no traction in the United States, where anyone has the right to take pictures of anything in plain sight from the street. Google declined to discuss the Spanish cases, instead issuing a statement saying that requiring search engines to ignore some data “would have a profound chilling effect on free expression without protecting people’s privacy”. In a blog post this year, Peter Fleischer, Google’s global privacy counsel, discussed the subject under the headline, “Foggy thinking about the Right to Oblivion.” The blog post made clear that he was speaking for himself, not

80 Google. But he left little doubt that he considered Europe’s efforts to forge new privacy rights poorly defined and misguided, raising complex legal and technical questions. In fact, the phrase “right to be forgotten” is being used to cover a batch of issues, ranging from those in the Spanish case to the behaviour of companies seeking to make money from private information that can be collected on the Web. Some European experts feel that new rules of play need to be drawn up anyway. Mr. Werro says many Europeans, including himself, are broadly uncomfortable with the way personal information is found by search engines and used for commerce. When ads pop up on his screen, clearly linked to subjects that are of interest to him he says he finds it Orwellian. A recent poll conducted by the European Union found that most Europeans agree. Three out of four said they were worried about how Internet companies used their information and wanted the right to delete personal data at any time. Ninety per cent wanted the European Union to take action on the right to be forgotten. Spain’s Data Protection Agency, created in the 1990s to protect individual rights, believes that search engines have altered the process by which most data ends up forgotten - and therefore adjustments need to be made. The Deputy Director of the agency, Jesus Rubi, pointed to the official government gazette, which used to publish every weekday, including bankruptcy auctions, official pardons, and who passed the civil service exams. Usually 220 pages of fine print, it quickly ended up gathering dust on various backroom shelves. The information was still there, but not easily accessible. Then two years ago, the 350-year old publication went online, making it possible for embarrassing information - no matter how old - to be obtained easily. Mr. Rubi said he doubted that anyone meant for the information to haunt citizens forever: “The law obliges us to put this info in the gazette. But I am sure that if the law was written today, legislators would say OK, publish this, but it should not be accessible by a search engine.” The publisher of the government publication, Fernando Perez said it was meant to foster transparency. Lists of scholarship winners, for instance, make it hard for the government officials to steer all the money to their own children.

81 “But may be,” he said, “there is information that has a life cycle and only has value for a certain time.” Experts say that Google and other search engines see some of these court cases as an assault on a principle of law already established – that search engines are essentially not responsible for the information they corral from the Web, and hope the Spanish court agrees. The companies believe if there are privacy issues, the complainants should address those who posted the material on the Web. But some experts in Europe believe that search engines should probably be reined in. “The say they are not publishing, so you should address yourself elsewhere,” said Javier de la Cueva, a Madrid lawyer specialising in the relationship between law and technology. “But they are the ones that are spreading the word. Without them no one would find these things.” (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated August 11, 2011)

Italy Pakistani investigative reporter, Syed Saleem Shahzad was on June 9, 2011 posthumously awarded an Italian journalism prize after he was abducted and tortured to death by unknown assassins in eastern Pakistan last month. Italy’s Ischia Prize Foundation granted Shahzad its International Journalism Award in a unanimous decision by the jury. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated June 10, 2011)

Africa Tim Hetherington, an Oscar-nominated British film director and war photographer, who covered numerous conflicts and won the 2007 World Press Photo Award for his coverage of US soldiers in Afghanistan and award winning US photographer Chris Hondros were killed and two other Western journalists wounded on April 20, 2011 in the besieged Libyan city of Misrata. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated April 22, 2011) Protesters are calling it “Black Tuesday”, the darkest day for South African democracy since the end of apartheid in 1994. Members of Parliament will almost certainly pass what is officially called the protection of information bill, otherwise known as the “secrecy bill”. The African National Congress (ANC) says it needs to update apartheid- era legislation safeguarding “valuable information by all organs of state”, and

82 has been emboldened by the revelations of wrong-doing at the News of the World and the crisis of press regulation in Britain. But opposition parties, civil society groups and the media warn of an existential threat to freedom of expression, a pillar of the progressive constitution drawn up under former President Nelson Mandela. The Congress of South African Trade Unions, usually an ANC ally, claims the bill puts too much power in the hands of government. An editorial in the bestselling Sunday Times said: “The South African public will be deprived of the vital oxygen of free information”. A war of words has raged between the two camps for more than a year. On one level, the vigorous debate suggests a teenage democracy in rude health. On another, the anger and insults have exposed an ugliness within South Africa’s body politic. The ANC has dominated party politics for 17 years, gaining almost double the votes of all its rivals combined. The media enjoys probably greater freedom than any other country in Africa and is seen by some as an unofficial opposition. South Africa’s energetic and vocal civil society movements are seen as vital in providing checks and balances to the distribution of power.

For years newspaper readers have feasted on a diet of corruption and financial scandals. The ANC is now attempting to muzzle the press, critics argue, so the powerful can line their pockets with impunity. The new laws would make it a crime to leak, possess or publish information deemed classified by the government, with whistleblowers and journalists facing up to 25 years in jail. A government source told the Guardian that recent events in Britain had given the ANC confidence to override the storm of opposition. “Phone hacking showed that not even Britain can make press self-regulation work”, he said. “We find it very telling that no South African editors have come out and said they never hack phones”. The bill is likely to be steamrollered through Parliament, although it must then go to a National Council of Provinces, and survive court challenges, before being signed into law by the President, Jacob Zuma, Activists have vowed to fight to the bitter end, with the Right2Know Campaign organising pickets around the country on November 22. Nadine Gordimer’s reaction

The Nobel Prize winning author Nadine Gordimer, said: “The ANC is taking South Africa back to the suppression of free expression of apartheid”. The National Press Club urged protesters to wear black clothing or a black ribbon or armband on Black Tuesday – the name of the campaign refers to

83 Black Wednesday on October 19, 1977 when the apartheid government banned two newspapers and 19 black consciousness movements after the death of activist Stevo Biko. (The Hindu, New Delhi dated November 23, 2011 ) China China’s propaganda authorities have placed two of Beijing’s most popular and colourful newspapers under new management, state press said, in a move decried by critics as an effort to censor the news. Beijing’s Communist Party run media authorities have taken over at the helm of the popular Beijing News and the Beijing Times, the government-run Qianlong website reported late on September 4, 2011. Both papers routinely run stories critical of local governments around China, as well as articles that defy edicts issued by the party’s propaganda bureau ordering media to show Chinese society in a positive light. Both began publishing about a decade ago and gained widespread popularity for their colourful stories and advertisements. The move was aimed at bringing the two papers under the control of local management and reining in an advertising war between the publications, the report said. The two papers may be merged into one, it added. (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated September 5, 2011) Days after three reporters from international news organisations were assaulted, the Beijing-based foreign correspondents’ club in China (FCCC) has warned its members to be careful and alert while on their jobs. The journalists from French and Danish news organisations were reporting from a village called Panhe in the eastern province of Zhejiang where residents had protested against local officials recently. Unidentified groups of people attacked the journalists in two separate cases; in one case note-books, documents handed over to the reporters by villagers and the memory card of a camera were snatched away. Villagers talking to the journalist were beaten up. He was then taken away by members of the local foreign affairs office but continued to be harassed on phone. In the second case involving a French television journalist, both he and his Chinese assistant were accosted by unidentified men after their vehicles was forced to stop. The latter was assaulted. This was after another vehicle, allegedly deliberately, crashed into their car forcing them to stop. Compensation was later paid to the scribe for the broken camera; medical expenses were also paid.

84 Police officers later said the young men were from Panhe, adding they were supporters of the government and were upset that foreign reporters were in their village to cover events. Subsequently, the FCCC – which is not recognised by the Chinese government — urged journalists reporting from the area to be “especially alert”. (The Hindustan Times, New Delhi dated February 22, 2012)

Australia Australia on July 21, 2011 moved to introduce a legal right to privacy after the phone hacking scandal in Britain, paving the way for people to sue media organisations for serious breaches. Laws are already in place to deal with criminal offences related to privacy breaches, but not a statutory cause of action. Home Affairs Minister, Brendan O’Connor said he was acting now after the News of the World furore heightened concerns. “Right now there is no general right to privacy in Australia, and that means there’s no certainty for anyone wanting to sue for an invasion of their privacy,” said O’Connor, whose government is in a running battle with some Murdoch owned publications. “The scandal and other recent mass breaches of privacy, both at home and abroad, have put the spotlight on whether there should be such a right.” O’Connor said Canberra would seek the views of the public immediately on introducing a right to privacy, and take it from there. “This government strongly believes in the principle of freedom of expression and also the right to privacy. Any changes to our laws will have to strike a balance between the two ideals,” he said. “Privacy is emerging as a defining issue of the modern era, especially as new technology provides more opportunities for communication, but also new challenges to privacy.” (The Asian Age, New Delhi dated July 22, 2011) Rupert Murdoch’s embattled media empire found itself facing fresh controversy on March 28, 2012 after an Australian newspaper published an investigative report alleging that had engaged a special unit in the mid-1990s to sabotage its competitors. This has led the Australian government to call for a criminal investigation into the claims. But News Ltd., the company’s Australian media wing, dismissed

85 the report as “laughable”, saying that it was filled with inaccuracies and baseless claims that had been dismissed by courts in other countries, including the US.

The newspaper, The Australian Financial Review, which is owned by one of Murdoch’s main Australian rivals, Fairfax Media, published more than 14,000 internal e-mails from a former News Corporation subsidiary along with the results of what it said was a four-year investigation into whether that company, NDS Group, encouraged the mass pirating of rival satellite television networks.

“These are serious allegations, and any allegations of criminal activity should be referred to the Australian Federal Police (AFP) for investigation”, Suzie Brady, a spokeswoman for Communications Minister Stephen Conroy, said in an e-mail exchange.

A spokeswoman for the police said that the agency had not yet received a request from the authorities to investigate the allegations in the report, which centred largely on the battle for dominance over Australia’s burgeoning pay TV market in the late 1990s but also touched on the company’s operations in Europe and the US.

The report states that Australia had no effective laws against pay TV piracy at the time, so the actions inside the country would not have been illegal at the time.

The report came a day after a BBC documentary made similar allegations against NDS Group in Britain, saying that it had paid a consultant to “crack” and publish on a pirate website the smart-card codes of a pay service that was started by ITV, the country’s free broadcaster. News Corporation has denied the claims in the BBC programme, Panorama.

The new e-mails, the newspaper said, had come from the hard drive of Ray Adams, a former commander in the Metropolitan Police in London who served as head of operational security for NDS Group in Europe from 1996 to 2002.

It appeared to show that a secret unit within the company called “Operational Security” promoted a wave of high-tech piracy that damaged the News Corporation rivals Austar and Optus at a time when the company was positioning itself to be the dominant player in the Australian pay TV industry. (The Telegraph, Kolkata dated March 29, 2012)

86 Sri Lanka A Sri Lankan court on April 28, 2011 ordered temporary blocking of a popular anti government news portal over the contempt of court charges. The Pugoda Magistrate’s Court asked the country’s Telecommunication Regulatory Commission to block the access of the ‘Lankaenews’ website until the conclusion of the court hearings regarding one of the portal’s journalists, who had been arrested on the charges of contempt of court. The website journalist Shantha Wijesuriya was arrested on April 25 after the website had carried a piece of wrong information on a case heard in the same court. Wijesuriya was asked to be further remanded until May 12, his lawyer, Namal Rajapaksha said. Later its Chief Editor, Bennet Rupasinghe was remanded for allegedly threatening the brother of one of the two suspects related to arson case on the website’s offices. (The Statesman, New Delhi dated April 29, 2011)

q

87 CHAPTER – II Adjudications in Complaints Regarding Threats to Press Freedom

The Press Council of India has been entrusted with the important task of promoting the freedom of the press and the independence of the newspapers and the news-agencies and journalists, keeping under review any development which may interfere with the free flow of information and dissemination of information, and monitoring development such as concentration of ownership of newspapers/matters relating to editor managerial relationship etc. which may affect the independence of the press. Cases of alleged harassment of journalists by way of attacks, threats or denial of facilities or infringement upon the independent working of the press find a mention in this chapter. The reviewed year saw 227 complaints pending from the previous one. 170 fresh complaints were filed during the year. A total of 397 matters thus required consideration. Owing to the time gap between the expiry of the term of the 10th Press Council and reconstitution of the 11th Press Council only 25 matters were disposed off by way of adjudication which included one matter directly considered by the Council while 228 were dismissed at preliminary stage for lack of grounds for inquiry, the matters being outside the Council’s charter or having gone to a court of law. 144 matters were under process at the end of the period under review. Text of the adjudications have been carried in the Council’s quarterly journal, ‘PCI Review’ in English and ‘Press Parishad Samiksha’ in Hindi and Compendium of Adjudications 2011-2012.

88 Categories of Complainants

D A 8% 4% A. English Press B. Indian Languages Press C. Journalist Associations/ News Agency D. Suo-motu C 28%

B 60%

Categories of Respondents

A. Police/Government Authorities B. Information Department D C. Institutions/Private Companies/ 4% Newspaper Management D. Private Persons B 32%

A 64%

89 Statewise Distribution of the Complainant Publications

8

7

6 5

4

3

2

1

0 No. of A B C D E F G H I J K Cases

90 Key to Abbreviation Total No. of Cases : 25

(Including one matter adjudicated directly by the Council)

A. Uttar Pradesh 7

B. Daman and Diu 2

C. Madhya Pradesh 2

D. Delhi 3

E. Haryana 2

F. Bihar 1

G. Rajasthan 2

H. Tamil Nadu 2

I. Karnataka 1

J. 2

K. Jammu & Kashmir 1

91 Harassment of Newsmen

Free expression of views or critical writings by the Press have often evoked violent reaction from those at the receiving end. While at times it takes the form of harassment, very often it leads to physical violence. The journalists working in the rural areas are the worst sufferers. In these areas, over enthusiastic low rung police officers harass them frequently on one pretext or the other. Endeavours to contain such unsavoury and undemocratic practices prevailing in the sphere of journalism require the co-operation of all concerned. The Council adjudicated a total of 13 such matters in the year. Of these, the charges, were found to be substantiated in five matters while two stood dismissed on merits. In two cases the respondents concerned made or assured adequate amends at Council’s behest. Four complaints were disposed off for non pursuance or for the matter having become sub-judice or when no action by the Council was found to be warranted after hearing the parties. The chart that follows makes the position more clear.

92 Harassment of Newsmen Total No. of Cases : 13

A. Upheld 5 B. Rejected 2 C. Assurance/Settled/Amends 2 D. Dropped for Non-pursuance/ 4 Withdrawal/ Sub-judice/ Lack of Substance

6

5

4

3

2

1

0 No. of A B C D Cases

93 Facilities to the Press

One very severe weapon often used by the governmental and other authorities into pressuring the newspapers to toe their line or in any way putting impediments in way of the free working of the press, is stoppage or reduction in the quantum of advertisements. In such situation the small and medium newspapers are worst affected. Another lever in the hands of the governmental authorities is the withdrawal or denial of accreditation facilities. Though these facilities cannot be claimed as a right, yet, in granting or distributing the same the authorities as custodians of public funds, have to ensure equality of treatment and fairness amongst similarly situated claimants. Council rendered 11 adjudications under this head during the year under review. Of these 11 complaints that fall under this category three were upheld, while one was rejected on merit. In six matters the Council dropped inquiry when respondents concerned made or assured adequate amends. Action was dropped in one matter on account of non-pursuance. Graphics below clarify the position further.

94 Facilities to the Press Total No. of Cases : 11

A. Upheld 3 B. Rejected 1 C. Assurance/Settled/Amends 6 D. Dropped for Non-pursuance/ 1 Withdrawal/ Sub-judice/ Lack of Substance

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 0 No. of A B C D Cases

95 Curtailment of Press Freedom

One would have thought that with the end of the era of repressive press laws and with the attainment of Independence by the country and adoption of our Constitution for a liberal, democratic, free society, the danger to the freedom of the press would disappear. But that was not to be. It appears that visibly and quietly, many damaging, pernicious and dangerous trends, which are curtailing the freedom of the press both from within and outside, have surfaced during this period. The press in our country, is sometimes in the line of fire of both the law makers and law breakers, directly or indirectly. Attacks on the press premises, raids on the press, organising demonstrations and assaulting and man-handling of press staff of newspaper are acts of curtailment of press freedom. The lone complaint adjudicated directly by the Council under this head was closed on the basis of the assurance given the respondent. A graphic presentation follows.

96 Curtailment of Press Freedom Total No. of Cases : 1

A. Upheld – B. Rejected – C. Assurance/Settled/Amends 1 D. Dropped for Non-pursuance/ – Withdrawal/Sub-judice/ Lack of Substance

1

0 No. of A B C D D Cases

97 CHAPTER – III Adjudications in Complaints Filed Against the Press

The twin objects for which the Press Council of India has been established are of preserving the freedom of the Press and of maintaining and improving the standards of newspapers and news agencies in India. For the latter, the Council has been enjoined to build up a code of conduct for newspapers, news agencies and journalists in accordance with high professional standards; ensuring on the part of the newspapers, the news agencies and the journalists, the maintenance of high standards of public taste and fostering a due sense of both the rights and responsibilities of citizenship; encouraging the growth of a sense of responsibility and public service among all those engaged in the profession of journalism; promoting a proper functional relationship among all classes of persons engaged in the production or publication of newspapers or in news agencies etc. In April 2011, 820 complaints were pending inquiry by the Council. During the course of the year, the Council was approached by 715 complainants, individually or as representative authorities/organizations. Thus, the Council was to consider in all 1535 complaints against the press during the year under review. 86 matters were disposed off through adjudications including one matter which was directly considered by the Council. 777 matters have been disposed off at the preliminary stage, either by settling these to the satisfaction of the parties or dismissing the complaints for lack of substance or on account of non-pursuance etc. Thus 672 matters were pending in this category at the close of the financial year under review. The detailed text of the adjudications can be seen in the Council’s quarterly house journals published in English as well as Hindi and also the Compendium of Adjudications 2011-2012.

98 Categories of Complainants

A. Government Authorities/ D Government Officers 2.32% A B. Private Persons C 23.26% 23.26% C. Institutions/Private Companies/Newspaper Associations D. Public Persons

B 51.16%

Categories of Respondents

A. English Press A B. Indian Languages 27.91% Press

B 72.09%

99 Statewise Distribution of the Respondent Publications

25

20

15

10

5

0 No. A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R of Cases

100 Key to Abbreviation Total No. of Cases : 86

(Including one matter adjudicated directly by the Council)

A. Uttar Pradesh 22 B. Andhra Pradesh 7 C. Karnataka 16 D. West Bengal 2 E. 1 F. Orissa 1 G. Delhi 13 H. Uttarakhand 1 I. Jammu & Kashmir 1 J. Haryana 4 K. Madhya Pradesh 2 L. Tamil Nadu 5 M. Rajasthan 1 N. Assam 1 O. Bihar 2 P. Maharashtra 4 Q. Chandigarh 2 R. Himachal Pradesh 1

101 Principles and Publication

Free press in expected to observe truth and impartiality in transmitting news as well as honesty in the expression of opinion. It therefore, is incumbent on the media to have a large measure of moral commitment. The entire media personnel, including proprietors, managers, editors and journalists are required to adopt and follow ethical behaviour in their respective spheres of functioning. In today’s competitive race for profiteering monetarily, the press is often seen to forget the missionary principles traditionally held dear by those in the profession of journalism. Publication of inaccurate reports, write-ups etc. and the refusal to publish rebuttals, are some of the mal- practices adopted by the press which violate the canons of ethical journalistic conduct. 19 complaints including one matter directly placed before the Council with these allegations were adjudicated upon during the year under review. Of these in five matters Council decided that no action was warranted after the respondents offered to make amends. Six other complaints stood rejected while the remaining eight were dropped for non-pursuance, withdrawal or for the matters having become sub-judice. The chart that follows makes the position more clear.

102 Principles and Publication Total No. of Cases : 19

A. Upheld – B. Rejected 6 C. Assurance/Settled/Amends 5 D. Dropped for Non-pursuance/ 8 Withdrawal/Sub-judice/Lack of Substance

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 No. of A B C D Cases

103 Press and Defamation

The number of persons approaching the Council, aggrieved by libellous writings, is increasing at an alarming rate. The defamation, whether it be of an individual or an institute, brands the affected party’s reputation, which is very difficult to retrieve. To ensure the non-recurrence of legislative attempts at control, it is essential that restraint be observed from within. However the press at times uses the medium to gratify private spite or personal greed and avarice by defaming persons/institutions through the columns of the newspapers. This tendency is comparatively higher in the smaller or the fly-by night newspapers. Defamatory writings against individuals/institutions are published as a reprisal measure due to personal enmity; for blackmailing for money; or some other favours sought from the persons/institutions concerned. In their enthusiasm for reporting, journalists often overlook the basic principles underlying the functions and duties of journalists. The Council adjudicated 63 complaints this year pertaining to alleged defamatory publications. Of these the press was found guilty of violation of journalistic ethics in 18 cases, while charges were rejected in 10. In eight matters, the Council was able to bring about reconciliation between parties while 27 complaints were disposed off for non-pursuance or on account of matters having become sub-judice or where no action by the Council was found to be warranted after hearing the parties. The following graphics explains the position.

104 Press and Defamation Total No. of Cases: 63

A. Upheld 18 B. Rejected 10 C. Assurance/Settled/Amends 8 D. Dropped for Non-pursuance/ 27 Withdrawal/Sub-judice/Lack of Substance

30

25

20

15

10

5

0 No. of A B C D Cases

105 Press and Morality

Decency and morality occupy an important place in Indian culture and society. Obscenity and its effect on public morality has for long been a subject of heated debate. There is a section of the Press, which under the influence of western culture has been carrying reports/columns/ advertisements and photographs which militate against the cultural ethos well entrenched in the minds of Indian society. Further, such publications do not serve public interest in any manner. The Indian Penal Code incorporates offences relating to public decency and morality. The relevant Sections are 292 and 292-A which make it punishable to sell or distribute obscene literature and objects, or to commit obscene acts, etc. Self- regulation however, is known to score over punitive action. In two matters falling under this head the Council adjudicated upon the question of obscenity. Action was dropped in one matter when the respondent gave assurance. Remaining one matter was dropped for non- pursuance or where no action by the Council was found to be warranted after hearing the parties. The following chart makes the position more clear.

106 Press and Morality Total No. of Cases : 2

A. Upheld – B. Rejected – C. Assurance/Settled/Amends 1 D. Dropped for Non-pursuance/ 1 Withdrawal/ Sub-judice/ Lack of Substance

1

0 No. of A B C D Cases

107 Communal, Casteist and Anti National Writings

The press has not remained untouched by waves of violence and terrorism lashing the country. While it has often been a victim, it has no less often been the cause of upsurge of these tendencies. The responsibility of the press in such circumstances cannot be over-emphasised. The Council itself in its various decisions has stressed the need for restraint and caution in writings where sentiments of communities or castes were involved so as not to give rise to communal passions and instead to live upto the expectation of its role of toning down hatred and enmity. During the period under review the Council adjudicated two complaints under this category. Of these, one matter was upheld while one was disposed off by the Council when the respondent gave assurance or offered to make amends. A graphic presentation follows.

108 Communal, Casteist and Anti National Writings Total No. of Cases : 2

A. Upheld 1 B. Rejected – C. Assurance/Settled/Amends 1 D. Dropped for Non-pursuance/ – Withdrawal/Sub-judice/ Lack of Substance

1

0 No. of A B C D Cases

109 CHAPTER – IV Finances of the Council 2011-2012

The funds of the Council are primarily made up of (i) fee levied by the Council on newspapers/periodicals registered with the Registrar of Newspapers for India and from the news-agencies and other miscellaneous receipts, like interest on bank account etc., and (ii) Grant-in-aid from the Central Government in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. The Budget Estimates of the Council for the financial year 2011-12, as accepted by the Central Government in 2010-11 was Rs.532.00 lakhs. Revising the estimates for 2011-12 in January, 2012 the Central Government accepted the budget of same amount i.e. Rs. 532.00 lakhs (the Grant-in-aid element) with Council’s revenue receipts estimated at Rs.119.50 lakh. This was against the Council’s Revised Estimates demand of Rs.657.53 lakhs. The Council added to its own revenue taking the final receipts to Rs.151.55 lakhs. Accordingly, while Council received grant-in-aid amounting to Rs.532.00 lakhs (Rs.5,31,76,762.00 as Grants-in-aid + Rs.23,238.00 unspent balance for previous year) during the financial year 2011-12 from the Central Government, it collected Rs.47.38 lakhs as fees levied upon newspapers/periodicals and news agencies and Rs.104.16 lakhs accounted for other miscellaneous receipts, like interest on bank accounts, interest on F.D.Rs with the Bank, etc. during the year under report. An amount of Rs.32.00 lakhs carried forward during the financial year 2012-13. As a result of efforts to realise as much revenue as possible from newspapers/ periodicals defaulting in payment of the fee levied on them under the mandate of the Act, during the year the Council recovered Rs.17,10,478.00 as outstanding levy of fee from the defaulters. This figure is included in the total figures of Rs.47,38,424.00 mentioned above. Section 22 of the Press Council Act, 1978 provides that the accounts of Press Council of India shall be maintained and audited in such manner as may, in consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, be prescribed. The Annual Accounts of the Press Council of India for the financial year 2011- 12 which were maintained in accordance with the aforesaid provisions, were audited by the Audit party of the office of the Director General of Audit, Central Revenues, New Delhi and certified to be to their satisfaction. The Annual Accounts of the Council are annexed hereto.

110 BALANCE SHEET As on 31st March 2012

111 PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2012

Amount Rs. LIABILITIES Schedule Current Year Previous Year

CAPITAL FUND 1 74,458,837 67,013,242

C.P.F. FUND 2 65,135,223 71,059,432

CURRENT LIABILITIES AND PROVISIONS 3 4,135,382 1,104,304

TOTAL 143,729,442 139,176,978

ASSETS

FIXED ASSETS 4 6,539,681 3,976,015

INVESTMENTS-FROM EARMARKED FUNDS 5 68,966,661 74,160,020

CURRENT ASSETS, LOANS, ADVANCES ETC. 6 68,223,100 61,040,943

TOTAL 143,729,442 139,176,978

SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES 13

CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND NOTES ON ACCOUNTS 25 14

Sd/- Sd/- (MARKANDEY KATJU) (VIBHA BHARGAVA) CHAIRMAN SECRETARY PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

112 PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR ENDED ON 31.03.2012 Amount Rs. INCOME Schedule Current Year Previous Year

Income from Levy Fees & Others 7 10,172,429 9,073,730

Grants from GoI 8 41,054,841 43,734,614

Interest Earned 9 7,362,130 6,400,315

TOTAL(A) 58,589,400 59,208,659

EXPENDITURE

Establishment Expenses 10 41,856,980 38,578,198

Other Administrative Expenses 11 12,096,309 9,296,405

Finance Charges 12 29,028 948

Depreciation(Corresponding to Schedule 5) 1,000,105 587,749

TOTAL(B) 54,982,422 48,463,300

Balance being excess of Income over Expenditure (A-B) 3,606,978 10,745,359 - Prior Period Adjustment Cr.(Dr.) 274,846 61,555 - Transfer to/from General Reserve

SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) CARRIED TO INCOME & EXPENDITURE A/C 3,881,824 10,806,914

SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES 13 CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND NOTES TO ACCOUNTS 14

Sd/- Sd/- (MARKANDEY KATJU) (VIBHA BHARGAVA) CHAIRMAN SECRETARY PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

113 PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA SCHEDULES FORMING PART OF BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2012

SCHEDULE 1 - CAPITAL FUND Amount Rs. Current Year Previous Year A. Capital Fund: Balance as at the beginning of the year 7,927,500 7,806,529 Add: Funds Capitalised During the Year 3,564,142 93,964 Add: Amount of fixed Assets understated in Previous years – 24,822 Add: Excess Amount written off in Previous Years now written Back – 2,185 11,491,642 7,927,500 Less: Amount of Fixed Assets overstated in Previous Year – – Less: Amount Written Off on condemned Assets 371 11,491,271 – 7,927,500 B. Income & Expenditure Account: Balance as at the beginning of the year 59,085,742 48,278,828 Add/(Deduct): Balance of net income/ (expenditure) 3,881,824 10,806,914 transferred from Income and Expenditure Account Add/(Deduct): Other adjustement (Please Specify) – 62,967,566 – 59,085,742

TOTAL 74,458,837 67,013,242

114 SCHEDULE 2 - C.P.F. FUNDS Amount Rs. Current Year Previous Year a) Opening balance of the funds 71,059,432 63,509,463 b) Addition to the Funds: i. Councils’ Contr. To C.P.F. 1,567,975 1,753,510 ii CPF Advance Recovered – 1,447,440 iii. Prior period adjustments 216,216 – iv. Employees’ Contr. To C.P.F. 7,720,886 7,895,954 v. Interest on C.P.F. Funds from Govt. 5,359,534 14,432,179 5,048,154 16,145,058 TOTAL (a+b) 85,491,611 79,654,521 c) Utilisation/Expenditure towards objectives of funds C.P.F. Withdrawls 6,862,800 2,075,565 Final Payments to Outgoing Employees 12,645,945 2,751,624 Reversal of excess credit of CPF in pr. Year – – CPF Advances 847,643 3,767,900 Recievable from Genral Fund A/c. – 20,356,388 – 8,595,089

Net Balance of Fund as at the year end (a+b-c) 65,135,223 71,059,432

Amount Rs. SCHEDULE 3 - CURRENT LIABILITIES AND PROVISIONS Current Year Previous Year

A. Current Liabilities:

1 Advances Received - Advance Levy of Fee 377,048 276,437 - Levy Fee Suspense 101,385 478,433 30,785 307,222

2 Security Deposits 31,000 31,000

3 Unspent Grant 3,221,483 23,238

4 Other current Liabilities 8,187 404,293

5 Payable to Heir of Ex employee 396,279 338,551

TOTAL (A) 4,135,382 1,104,304

B. PROVISIONS ––

TOTAL (A+B) 4,135,382 1,104,304

115 SCHEDULE 4 SCHEDULE FORMING PART OF PARTICULARS GROSS BLOCK Cost As on Addition During Sale/Trf. During Cost As on 1.4.2011 the Year the Year 31.3.2012 Air conditioners & Coolers 938,085.00 – – 938,085.00 Attendance Recording System 82,000.00 – – 82,000.00 Cars & Bicycle 745,737.00 1,630,694.00 – 2,376,431.00 Computer/Peripharals 3,573,085.00 1,680,250.00 – 5,253,335.00 Conference System 27,820.00 – – 27,820.00 EPABX System 258,800.00 – – 258,800.00 Furniture & Fixture 4,178,761.00 125,036.00 – 4,303,797.00 Heat Convector & Heaters 35,764.00 1,600.00 – 37,364.00 Library Books 747,765.00 73,099.00 371.57 820,492.43 Mobile Phones 11,300.00 19,797.00 – 31,097.00 Refrigerator 52,535.00 – – 52,535.00 Solar Water Heating System 110,227.00 – – 110,227.00 Stabilisers 71,434.00 – – 71,434.00 Tape Recorders 6,618.00 – – 6,618.00 Television 78,190.00 18,176.00 – 96,366.00 Typewriter & Duplicator 133,029.00 – – 133,029.00 Water Dispencer 28,800.00 15,490.00 – 44,290.00 Total 11,079,950.00 3,564,142.00 371.57 14,643,720.43

116 SCHEDULE 4

BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2012 DEPRECIATION NET BLOCK Upto For the Written Total W.D.V. W.D.V. 31.3.2011 year Back 31.3.2012 31.3.2011 609,472.00 49,292.00 – 658,764.00 279,321.00 328,613.00 42,405.00 5,939.00 – 48,344.00 33,656.00 39,595.00 559,822.00 279,115.00 – 838,937.00 1,537,494.00 185,915.00 2,472,549.00 291,624.00 – 2,764,173.00 2,489,162.00 1,100,536.00 26,742.00 162.00 – 26,904.00 916.00 1,078.00 172,377.00 12,963.00 – 185,340.00 73,460.00 86,423.00 2,478,054.00 270,629.00 – 2,748,683.00 1,555,114.00 1,700,707.00 21,431.00 2,390.00 – 23,821.00 13,543.00 14,333.00 384,759.70 60,608.00 – 445,367.70 375,124.73 363,005.30 5,402.00 2,370.00 – 7,772.00 23,325.00 5,898.00 31,067.00 3,220.00 – 34,287.00 18,248.00 21,468.00 57,003.00 7,984.00 – 64,987.00 45,240.00 53,224.00 46,157.00 3,792.00 – 49,949.00 21,485.00 25,277.00 4,213.00 361.00 – 4,574.00 2,044.00 2,405.00 54,802.00 4,871.00 – 59,673.00 36,693.00 23,388.00 122,785.00 1,537.00 – 124,322.00 8,707.00 10,244.00 14,894.00 3,248.00 – 18,142.00 26,148.00 13,906.00 7,103,934.70 1,000,105.00 – 8,104,039.70 6,539,680.73 3,976,015.30

117 SCHEDULE 5 - INVESTMENTS FROM EARMARKED FUNDS Amount Rs. Current Year Previous Year

1. Fixed Deposits with Schedule Banks

- Against C.P.F. Fund 61,566,392 63,416,775

- FDR Interest Accrued thereon 7,400,269 68,966,661 10,743,245 74,160,020

TOTAL 68,966,661 74,160,020

SCHEDULE 6 - CURRENT ASSETS, LOANS, ADVANCES ETC. Amount Rs. Current Year Previous Year A. CURRENT ASSETS: 1. Sundry Debtors: - On Account of Levy Fees Debts Outstanding for a period exceeding six months 52,155,627 41,350,936 Others – 52,155,627 5,266,554 46,617,490 2. Cash balances in hand (including Postage in Hands and imprest) Imprest Account Balance 11,083 10,000 Postage Stamps in Hands – 11,083 1,366 11,366 3. Bank Balances: - With Scheduled Banks: Saving Accounts - State Bank of Hyderabad - General Account 3,094,532 6,523 - State Bank of Hyderabad - Revolving Account 439,677 451,987 - State Bank of Hyderabad - Levy Fee Account 114,576 5,349 - State Bank of Hyderabad - C.P.F. Account 3,674,145 7,322,930 7,513,754 7,977,613 Deposit Accounts - State Bank of Hyderabad - Revolving Account 2,079,641 2,422,410 - State Bank of Hyderabad - Shashi Tandon 191,786 – - State Bank of Hyderabad - Rajesh Kaur – – - State Bank of Hyderabad - Sushila Devi 165,881 2,437,308 165,881 2,588,291

TOTAL (A) 61,926,948 57,194,760

118 SCHEDULE 6 - (continued) Amount Rs.

Current Year Previous Year

B. LOANS,ADVANCES AND OTHER ASSETS

1 Loans to Staff: - Fan Advance – – - Cycle Advance 3,125 – - Car Advance 188,010 278,946 - Festival Advance 70,425 60,000 - Housing Building Advance 747,567 40,803 - Scooter Advance 400 1,009,527 5,400 385,149

2 Advances and other amounts recoverable in cash or in kind/or for value to be received: - On Capital Account – – - Prepayments - Advance for Books Periodicals 8,340 10,625 - Advance to Parties 3,421,926 2,043,518 - TA Advance 444,582 61,662 - Tax Deducted at Source 778,762 690,858 - Others - Salary Recoverable – – - Other Advances 200 10,000 - LTC Advances – 37,228 - C.P.F. Suspense – 4,653,810 – 2,853,891

3 Income Accrued a) On Deposits of Revolving Account 576,478 581,381 b) On Deposits of Sushila Devi (Ex Employee) 24,753 6,288 (includes income due unrealised-Rs…….. c) On Deposits of Shashi Tandon (Ex Emp.) 12,110 – 4 Deposits with Different Departments 19,474 19,474 TOTAL (B) 6,296,152 3,846,183

TOTAL (A +B) 68,223,100 61,040,943

119 SCHEDULE 7 - INCOME FROM LEVY FEES & OTHERS Amount Rs. Current Year Previous Year

1 Levy fees received from Newspapers/ Periodicals/News Agencies 4,738,424 3,729,442 Add:Demand raised for previos year – – Add:Advance of Previous Years adjusted – 116,315 Add:Fees outstanding for current Year 7,330,965 6,203,019 Less: Fees received for previous Years 1,710,478 930,175 Less: Fees received in advance/suspense 253,561 10,105,350 156,676 8,961,925

2 Others(Specify) - Sale of Waste Papers – 4,724 - Profit on Sale of Assets – 8,745 - Fee for Information under Right to Information Act 2,882 3,599 - Income from Advertisment in Souvenir 62,500 – - Other 1,697 67,079 94,737 111,805

TOTAL 10,172,429 9,073,730

SCHEDULE 8 - GRANTS Amount Rs. Current Year Previous Year

(Irrevocable Grants & Subsidies Received) - Central Government (Ministry of I & B) - Grant Received During the Year 53,176,762 48,678,574 - Add: Unspent Grant for the Previous Year 23,238 221,396 53,200,000 48,899,970 - Less: Grant Utilised for Interest on C.P.F. Funds 5,359,534 5,048,154 - Less: Grant Utilised for Fixed Assets 3,564,142 93,964 - Less: Unspent Grant for the Current Year 3,221,483 41,054,841 23,238 43,734,614

TOTAL 41,054,841 43,734,614

120 SCHEDULE 9 - INTEREST EARNED Amount Rs. Current Year Previous Year

1 On Term Deposits:

a) With Scheduled Banks - CPF Account (trf to General Fund) Interest Received During the Year – – Add: Tax Deducted at Source – – Less: Related to Previous Years – 4,588 Less: Interest excess booked reversed in Pr. Year – – Add: Interest Accrued for the Year 6,583,741 6,583,741 5,707,594 5,703,006

- Revolving Fund Account Interest Received During the Year – – Add: Tax Deducted at Source – – Add: Interest Accrued for the Year 250,014 237,426 Less: Related to Previous Years – 250,014 – 237,426

- General Fund Account Interest Received During the Year 117,723 58,972 Add: Tax Deducted at Source – – Add: Interest Accrued for the Year – – Less: Related to Previous Years 117,723 58,972

2 On Savings Accounts:

a) With Scheduled Banks - General Fund Account 308,712 109,989 - CPF Account (Trf. To General Fund) 58,855 108,643 - Levy Fees Account 20,803 10,249 - Revolving Fund (Loans & Advances) 15,390 403,760 15,960 244,841

3 On Loans:

a) Employees/Staff - Scooter Advance 4,000 8,301 - Cycle Advance – – - Housing Building Advance 2,892 2,892 - Fan Advance – – - Motor Car Advance – 6,892 – 11,193

4 Interest on FDR (Ex Employees) – – – 144,877

TOTAL 7,362,130 6,400,315

121 SCHEDULE 10 - ESTABLISHEMENT EXPENSES Amount Rs. Current Year Previous Year a) Salaries and Wages 31,939,880 30,436,870 b) Arrear of Salaries 658,856 2,562,223 c) OTA 16,096 14,975 d) Tution Fees Reimbursement 500,094 396,639 e) Medical Reimbursement 736,457 928,477 f) Bonus 210,393 206,956 g) L.T.C. 527,873 503,121 h) Encashment of E.L. 2,433,605 705,808 i) Contribution to Provident Fund 1,567,975 1,753,510 j) Expenses on Employees’ Retirement and Terminal Benefits 3,260,411 1,050,919 k) Traning to Staff (Hindi Karyashala) 5,340 18,700

Total 41,856,980 38,578,198

122 SCHEDULE 11 - OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES Amount Rs. Current Year Previous Year

1 Electricity and Water 1,626,132 682,271

2 Office Expense 351,823 262,292

3 Insurance 5,940 –

4 Repairs and maintenance 2,701,193 2,041,735

5 Vehicles Repairs and Maintenance 262,816 270,154

6 Travelling and conveyance Expenses 1,172,360 2,944,566

7 Rent, Rates and Taxes 325,329 268,976

8 Postage, Telephone and Communication 1,008,327 909,117 Charges

9 Printing and Stationary 1,202,609 1,100,480

10 Newspapers & Periodicals 114,708 113,393

11 Liveries to Class IV Staff 59,923 7,205

12 Hindi Protsahan Award 12,190 7,280

13 Subscription Expenses 5,544 –

14 Legal & Professional Charges 137,857 231,985

15 Entertainment 74,494 85,043

16 Exhibition & Seminar 2,579,534 301,925

21 Others(specify)- Sundries 139,684 63,683

22 Provision for Bad and Doubtful lDebts/ – 6,300 Advances

23 Tax Deducted – –

24 Staff training Exp. 34,600 –

25 Advertismnet Exp. 281,246 –

26 Other Exp..

TOTAL 12,096,309 9,296,405

Note: Electricity & Water Expenses are incurred towards chairman’s residence.

123 SCHEDULE 12 - FINANCE CHARGES Amount Rs. Current Year Previous Year

a) On Fixed Loans – –

b) On Other Loans (including Bank Charges) 1,875 948

c) Other (specify) – –

d) Interest Paid to Ex-Employee 27,153 –

TOTAL 29,028 948

124 PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA SCHEDULE FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED ON 31.03.2012

SCHEDULE 13- SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES:- 1. Accounting Convention The financial statements are prepared on the basis of historical cost convention unless otherwise stated. 2. Method of Accounting Council is following the accrual method of accounting unless otherwise stated. 3. Investments a) Investments against C.P.F. Fund are classified as earmarked investments b) Investments against Revolving (Loans & Advances) account are treated as current assets. c) Investments are shown at the principal value as increased by the interest accrued thereon. 4. Fixed Assets a) Fixed assets are stated at cost of acquisition inclusive of duties and taxes thereon. Other direct expenses related to acquisition are not capitalized. b) Capital Fund is maintained to denote the cost of fixed assets. 5. Depreciation Depreciation is being charged as per the rates prescribed in the Income Tax Rules at the Following rates i.e. Furniture & Fixture @ 10% and Other Assets at the general rate @ 15%. 6. Government Grant a) Government Grants are accounted on cash basis. b) Grants utilized toward the addition of fixed assets are transferred to the Capital Fund. c) Grants utilized towards the interest on C.P.F. Fund are transferred to C.P.F. Account. d) Unspent Grant for the year are transferred to Reserve & Surplus to further use in the next year.

125 7. Retirement Benefits

a) Retirement benefits are accounted on cash basis. No provision for gratuity payable, leave encashment etc. is made b) The Council is maintaining its own C.P.F. Fund.

Sd/- Sd/- (MARKANDEY KATJU) (VIBHA BHARGAVA) CHAIRMAN SECRETARY PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

126 PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA SCHEDULE FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED ON 31.03.2012

SCHEDULE 14 - CONTINGENT LIABILITIES & NOTES OF THE ACCOUNTS

A. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES

Claim against the Council not acknowledged as debts Rs. NIL (Previous Year NIL)

B. NOTES OF THE ACCOUNTS

1. Current Assets, Loans & Advances a. Balance in the Sundry Debtors, Advances for Books & Periodicals and Advances to Parties have not been confirmed from the respective parties/departments b. In the opinion of the management of the Council, the other current assets, loans & advances have a realizable value equal at least to the amount shown in the Balance Sheet, in the ordinary course of business.

2. Provision for Taxation

In view of the income of the Council being exempt from tax, no provision for taxation has been made.

3. Corresponding figures for the previous year have been regrouped/rearranged, wherever necessary.

Sd/- Sd/- (MARKANDEY KATJU) (VIBHA BHARGAVA) CHAIRMAN SECRETARY PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

127 PRESS COUNCIL RECEIPT AND PAYMENTS FOR

Receipts Current Year Previous Year

I. Opening Balance (a) Cash in hand (Imprest Account) 10,000 5,932 (b) Bank Balances – General Fund 6,523 190,309 – Levy of Fees Account 451,987 479,634 – Revolving Fund (Loans & Advances) 5,349 20,714 – C.P.F. Account 7,513,754 7,977,613 8,917,565 9,608,222 (c) Postage Stamps in Hand 1,366 4,441

II. Grants Received (a) From Government of India 53,176,762 48,678,574 (Ministry of I & B)

III. Interest Received a) On Bank deposits – Term Deposits 10,191,597 203,849 – Saving Accounts 403,760 10,595,357 244,841 448,690

(b) Loans, Advances etc. 6,892 11,193

IV. Other Income (specify) Levy fees received from Newspapers/ Periodicals/News Agencies 4,738,424 3,729,442 Others except Profit on Sale of Asset 67,079 103,060 Arrears of Sixth Pay Commission – – Recovered Sale of Asset 327 9,000

V. Receipts from Matured Investments Encashment of FDRs – Revolving Fund Account 1,891,939 1,077,413 – C.P.F. Account 56,385,032 7,189,072 General Fund 15,000,000 7,500,000 Towards Employee – 73,276,971 804,307 16,570,792

VI. Any Other Receipts (a) Refund of Securities Deposit with Department – – – Computer Maintenance – – – –

128 OF INDIA THE YEAR ENDED ON 31.03.2012

Payments Current Year Previous Year

I. Expenses (a) Establishment Expenses 41,856,980 38,426,712 (Corresponding to Schedule 10) (b) Administrative Expenses 11,981,224 9,876,838 (Correspondent to Schedule 11) (c) Paid towards Expense Payable 327,713 –

II. Payments made against funds Against Revolving Fund (Loans & Advances) – Disbursements of Loans – Festival Advance 123,750 105,000 – Cycle Advance 3,750 – – Moter Car Advance – 160,000 – House Building Advance 750,000 877,500 – 265,000

Against C.P.F. Fund – Advance / Withdrawal to Staff 9,052,790 5,843,465 – Final Payments to Outgoing 12,645,945 21,698,735 2,751,624 8,595,089 Employees

III. Investments and deposits made (a) Out Earmarked/Endowment funds – Against Revolving Fund (Loans & Advances) 1,549,170 1,077,413 – Against C.P.F. Fund 54,534,649 56,083,819 15,443,511 16,520,924 (b) Out of own funds (Investments-Others) 15,000,000 7,500,000 Towards Employee 191,786 15,191,786 1,089,197 8,589,197

IV. Expenditure on Fixed Assets & Capital work-in-progress (a) Purchase of Fixed Assets – Library Books 73,099 4,651 – Furniture & Others 3,471,246 89,313 – Telephone Instruments 19,797 3,564,142 – 93,964

129 Receipts Current Year Previous Year

(b) Recovery of Advances – Housing Building Advance 43,236 13,236 – Festival Advances 113,325 96,000 – Scooter Advances 5,000 28,000 – Motor Car Advance 90,936 65,336 – Cycle Advance 625 – – Table Fan Advance – – 202,572 – From Parties 253,122 – –

(c) Recovery from Employee 1,579 76,580 Towards Liability Payable 8,187 – C.P.F. Contribution and refund loan 9,063,233 9,072,999 9,270,728 9,347,308

(d) Amount trf from General Fund to C.P.F. Fund on account of: – Council’s Contribution to PF 1,567,975 1,753,510 – Interest on Employees’ Contribution 3,544,633 3,443,152 – Interest on Council’s Contribution 1,814,901 1,605,002 – Others – 6,927,509 – 6,801,664

(e) Amount Excess trf to General Fund from C.P.F. Fund – On a/c of rec.of PCI Contr.to CPF – – – Others – – –

TOTAL 166,104,421 95,520,890

130 Payments Current Year Previous Year

(b) Expenditure on Capital

V. Refund of surplus money/loans (a) To the Government of India – – (b) Excess of Levy fee Refunded – – (c) Excess Recovery Loan Refunded – – – –

VI. Finance Charges (Interest) 1,875 948

VII. Other Payments (Specify) (a) Amount trf from General Fund to C.P.F. Fund on account of: – Interest on Employees’ Contribution 3,544,633 3,443,152 – Interest on Council’s Contribution 1,814,901 1,605,002 – Others – 5,359,534 – 5,048,154

(b) Advance – for Books & Periodicals 8,340 10,625 – for Capital Assets – – – for Others 1,818,560 1,826,900 104,460 115,085 (d) Medical Advance to Staff 200 – (e) Excess trf from C.P.F. Fund to General Fund – –

VIII. Closing Balances (a) Cash in hand (Imprest Account) 8,708 10,000 (b) Bank Balances – General Fund 3,094,532 6,523 – Levy of Fees Account 114,576 451,987 – Revolving Fund (Loans & Advances) 439,677 5,349 – C.P.F. Account 3,674,145 7,322,930 7,513,754 7,977,613 (c) Postage Stamps in Hand 2,375 1,366

TOTAL 166,104,421 95,520,890

Sd/- Sd/- (MARKANDEY KATJU) (VIBHA BHARGAVA) CHAIRMAN SECRETARY PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

131 Annexure - A

Statement of Cases (April 1, 2011 - March 31, 2012)

S.No. Particulars Section-13 Section-14 Total

1. Cases pending as on 227 820 1047 March 31, 2011 2. Cases filed between April 1, 2011 170 715 885 to March 31, 2012 3. Cases adjudicated between 24 85 109 April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2012 4. Cases directly reported to the 1 1 2 Council 5. Cases decided under the proviso 228 777 1005 to Regulation 5(1) of Inquiry Regulations, 1979 between April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2012 6. Cases under process as on 144 672 816 March 31, 2012

*Includes two cases remitted back by the Council.

132 Annexure - B

Colloquium Report: Delhi Declaration

“Let the enlightened people all over the world and media and media organizations working in every part of this beautiful planet of ours remain united in their relentless effort to build a free serving human societies across the globe deeply committed and professed to preserve the dignity of human soul and advance the cause for harmony, peace and prosperity for everyone in the globe with compassion, love and respect for all and rancour to none.” Eleanor Roosevelt

The two – day International Colloquium at New Delhi, India convened by the Press Council of India provided an International platform for media to adjudge its promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms and also interact and exchange views on various aspects of the press scenario throughout the world. The deliberations laid special emphasis on (i) Freedom of Expression Vs. Rights of the Civil Society (ii) Media as a Defender of Human Rights, (iii) Reporting on Human Rights Excesses and (iv) Promoting Peace Journalism. The deliberations drew upon Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) which states that “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interferences and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers, to exchange experience in their respective countries.” The Colloquium accepted that while freedom of speech and expression is an inalienable human right, well recognized by the United Nations in its Charter of Declaration of Human Rights, paradoxidly, such freedom of speech and expression is not enjoyed by people in large number of countries. The voice of the people in such countries is either partly controlled or largely controlled by the authorities in power. Consequently, the concept of free media is still a dream in many countries where authorities in power are not ready to allow their people and their media to exercise such inalienable human right openly and freely. The participating countries in the International Colloquium gave insight to the status of free speech and human rights scenario in their respective countries and expressed that it is also paradoxical that in many countries including India where freedom of speech and expression of their people is not only recognized but respected and consequently media is fiercefully independent, there is need

133 to regulate media in such countries to ensure that the free Press functions observing well accepted media ethics. Conversely in large number of countries where people have been denied freedom of speech and expression and media in such countries are also not allowed to function as a free press, it is the anxiety of media organizations and associations of media houses all over the world to work out effective ways and means to achieve for them freedom of speech and expression. Taking stock of the incidents of onslaught on media the stakeholders observed that diverse forms of media have been struggling for over past one century to promote and strengthen the rights of free speech to express freely and fairly their view point on matters of public interest and importance. Media freedom was thus discussed in the background of human rights so as to evolve a clear view regarding the issues involved. Media has a freedom, right and duty to supply valid and useful information to the public because that would help the people to achieve better governance. In this sense media freedom is part of, if not, an amplification of “human rights of free expression and right to receive information but if media itself abuses this freedom, it then commits human righst, abuse”. Trial by media, paid news, sting operations, whistle blowing and intrusions into private domain are some of the tendencies of the media which may act as a catalyst amounting to human right abuse directly or indirectly. In such a situation existence of Press/Media Councils becomes necessary to promote ethics and standards in profession of journalism to encourage media to follow ethics specific to respective countries. Based upon the deliberations, the conclusions and recommendations of International Colloquium were drawn up.

Conclusions 1. The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights recognizes that human rights are founded upon the inherent dignity of every person. This dignity and the right of equality, liberty, freedom of the press which stem from it are universal, indivisible, interrelated, and interdependent. The stakeholders all over the world have been promoting and strengthening the rights of the press on behalf of the public, to express freely and fairly its opinion on matters of public interest and importance. 2. Media has a bounden duty to focus on human rights violations. While reporting such violations media must be fair, impartial and objective. Free and

134 fair media can be engaged by human rights groups effectively in their struggle for protection of human rights. 3. Media being a reflection of society is most suitable medium to lend voice to the victims of human rights violations. It is, however, to be borne in mind that right to freedom of expression though an absolute basic human right, is not without limits. These limitations al beit become operational only in narrowly defined exceptional circumstances. 4. The new era of media, with the massive distribution of news and information, requires leadership and guidance for better understanding the concepts of values cherished by the society and also motivation of civil society in the efforts to be more and more sensitive, tolerant and compassionate to bring a peaceful and harmonious social order. 5. Certain sections of media also suffers from a deep elitist bias. This bias is blatantly clear when the human rights of the rich and the middle class are under question. While there may be nothing wrong in upholding the rights of the privileged, the rights of the underprivileged should receive same attention, if not greater. 6. The media views the violation of human rights as sporadic events and isolated happenings. But, the media fails to connect them with the social, political processes and the economic policies that lead to violation of human rights. 7. Media can help in avoiding and deescalating conflicts and promoting peace making efforts. Peace and prosperity of all the nations across the globe must be paramount consideration of mankind as a whole and the media serving the cause of humanity and peaceful world order must strive to achieve them. 8. Privacy vs. the right of freedom of speech and expression a delicate and debatable issue. The predominant view may prevail is that privacy has to be overridden where public interest is of paramount importance i.e. in cases of corruption, where issue of good governance or back room lobbying etc. is involved. Recommendations 1. The Media Regulatory bodies/Media organizations world over need to mobilize world opinion and get active support of U.N. and various other organizations working for protection of human rights, so that freedom of speech and expression unjustly denied to some nations against the spirit of a free nation and mandate in the U.N. Charter, is achieved. In isolation, it is difficult for a

135 nation to achieve freedom of speech and expression. A strong voice of protest is needed to be raised by other nations and mobilization of world opinion so that giving such rights becomes imperative. Such, restraint is particularly important where society is fragile in view of multi-lingual, multi-ethnic and multi-religious denominations, very often tormented by evil design of fundamentalists and divisive agencies. 2. Media reporting needs to show greater sensitivity while reporting on Human Rights violations and should take proper care and caution so that the exhibition of photos of traumatized victims does not create shock and fear amongst the public and induce ‘hate crimes’ in retaliation. 3. Media in its role as the watchdog of the nation can play an important role in defending and protecting the rights of the civil society. With its enormous reach and power, media can highlight any violation of human rights anywhere in the world and can make authorities aware of their duties and also educate the people and make them aware of their rights and infringement of such rights. While reporting such violations media must be fair, impartial and truly objective. Media must eschew any influence by the government, political parties and other organizations in its activities of fair reporting of events and suggest appropriate remedial measure.

4. In the matter of terrorism and insurgencies, the media whether print or electronic, should be guided by the compulsion of self imposed restraint and anxiety to prevent further violations of human rights and the loss of more life on account of media reporting. Experienced hands should be posted who can report all sides and aspects of events fairly and objectively. Clearly, the psychological warfare by terrorists, orchestring human rights violation needs careful, unbiased and thorough investigation to isolate the chaff from the grain. 5. Media can make people aware of the need to promote certain values including protection and preservation of human rights which remained as eternal core value to the mankind. Peace, non-violence, disarmament, maintenance and promotion of ecological balances and unpolluted environment and ensuring human rights to all irrespective of caste, colour and creed should be the minimum common agenda for the media. 6. In pursuit of commercial interests media must avoid sensationalism or trivialization of issues.

7. Media must not lose its focus on its role as fourth estate and its concern and devotion to welfare and well being of the society with orientation for welfare and well being for many. Media plays a constructive role when it gives

136 voice to the inarticulate, when it focuses on the suffering of the oppressed and exploited, indifference and neglect of poor and weaker segments of the society. The journalists and the media organizations must remember that media is not a business or profession per se. The business of media and profession of journalists are richly overtoned with mission – the unfailing mission of being a fourth estate and a vibrant partner in democracy. There is no room for compromise with this noble mission. 8. The media advocacy should, therefore, become the voice for the inarticulate. The violation of human rights of the poor are taken as a routine and a daily reality. The violation of human rights of the rich attract huge attention of the media. The class bias in reporting issues of human rights needs to be eliminated. 9. Civil society should act as a watchdog. A critical evaluation of media should form part of academic curriculum of schools and colleges. Social pressure at grass root level would provide a human rights perspective for the media. 10. The authorities should publicly acknowledge the importance and legitimacy of the work of human rights defenders i.e. anyone who “individually and in association with others, promotes and strive for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and international levels. Specific attention must be given to human rights defenders who face particular risks. 11. Full implementation of laws and policies which guarantee human rights and fundamental freedoms of human rights defenders should be ensured. 12. Efforts should be made to continue making full use of United Nations Special Procedures and other international human rights mechanisms when reporting on human rights violations. 13. The situation of human rights defenders, in particular the most targeted and vulnerable ones, should be continually monitored, and support for their work should be expressed through, inter alia, interventions before central and state institutions. 14. The media should act as a catalyst for bringing peace and harmony and should exercise caution and restraint especially in matters which are likely to escalate conflict. 15. Privacy of an individual is sacrosanct, unless outweighed by genuine public interest.

137 The International Colloquium at its close: Recorded: its appreciation of the efforts and hospitality offered by the Press Council of India in facilitating exchange of views and information amongst mediapersons, academicians, Press/Media Councils of different countries; Expressed: Confidence that similar meets in future will provide platform for promotion of Human Rights and Freedom of Expression and self-regulation in the media world over. Reaffirmed: In the present era of globalization, journalism and human rights meet at a point of remarkable and historical change. Good journalism is one of the allies striving for democracy and human rights protection. The media can and has historically played a pivotal role in not only creating awareness of those inherent rights following their adoption by the UN and the signatory countries but has consciously acted as a gate-keeper by reporting excesses against these rights.

138 Annexure - C

New Members Notified for 11th Term

The Central Government in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting vide Gazette of India; Extraordinary No. S.O. 1401 (E) dated June 15, 2011 notified the names of twenty seven new members for the 11th three year term of Press Council of India. One name awaits notification. The Gazette Notification is reproduced herein below:– The Gazette of India EXTRAORDINARY PART II – Section 3 – Sub-section (ii) PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY No. 1163 NEW DELHI, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15, 2011/JYAISTHA 25, 1933 MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 15th June, 2011 S.O. 1401(E).– In pursuance of sub-section (5) of section 5 of the Press Council Act, 1978 (37 of 1978), read with rules 3 and 4 of the Press Council (Procedure for Nomination of Members) Rules, 1978, the Central Government hereby notifies the names of the following persons nominated as members to the Press Council of India for a period of three years from the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette, namely:- Working Journalists- Editors (nominated under clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 5) 1. Shri K.S. Sachidananda Murthy, Editor, Malayala Manorama Malayala Manorama, 2/11, INS Buildings Editors of Indian Rafi Marg, New Delhi-110 001. Languages Newspapers Res: C-51, IFS Apartments, Mayur Vihar, Phase-I, New Delhi-110 091

139 2. Shri Shravan Kumar Garg, Editor, Dainik Bhaskar, 402, Rattan Jyoti Building Rajendra Place, New Delhi-110 008

Res: B3/25, Safdarjung Enclave, Ground Floor, New Delhi-110 029

3. Shri Jagjit Singh Dardi, Editor, Charhdikala, 593, SST Nagar, Patiala (Punjab)

Res: 844, SST Nagar, Patiala (Punjab)

4. Shri Sheetla Singh, Editor, Janmorcha Editors of Indian Industrial Estate, Gaddopur, Languages Newspapers Faizabad-224 001 Uttar Pradesh

Res: 9/8/97, Begum Ganj, Makbara, Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh

5. Shri Anil Jugalkishor Agrawal, Editor, Daily Amravati Mandal, Kharparde Bagicha, Amravati, Maharashtra

Res: Macchhisath, Sath Khiradi, Near Yukubkhaband, Amravati-444 601 Maharashtra 6. Shri Bishambhar Newar Editor, Chhapte-Chhapte, 26-C, Creek Row, Kolkata-14

Res: 5BD, Laxmi Towers, 541, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata-700 003

140 Working Journalists- other than Editors (nominated under clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 5)

7. Shri Rajeev Ranjan Nag Media House, 275-276, Captain Gaur Marg Sriniwas Puri, New Delhi-110 065

Res: 8-D, Skylark Apartments, Gazipur, Delhi-110 096

8. Shri Uppala Lakshman Working Journalists not Off./Resi.: 1-1-651/A/4, Pent House being editors of Indian Lalitha Krishana Apartments, Languages Newspapers Gandhi Nagar, Street No. 2, Hyderabad-500 080 Andhra Pradesh

9. Shri Arvind S. Tengse Res: 354, Buticas Navelim, Salcete, Goa-403 707

10. Shri Kosuri Amarnath News Services Syndicate, 3-5-874/4, First Floor, Street No. 5, Hyderguda Hyderabad-500 029

Res: 6-3-14/101, Sai Residency, Hastinapuri Colony, Sainikpuri, Hyderabad-500 094

11. Shri Kalyan Barooah Assam Tribune 3/14, INS Buildings, Rafi Marg, Working Journalists not New Delhi being editors of Newspapers other than Res: 92, Kala Vihar, Indian Languages Mayur Vihar, Phase-I(Extn.), Newspapers Delhi

141 12. Shri Sondeep Shankar, (Off./Resi.): I-3, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi-110 014 Working Journalists not being editors of 13. Shri Arun Kumar, Newspapers other than The Times of India, Times House, Indian Languages Fraser Road, Patna-800 001 Newspapers

Res: Abedin House (Top Floor), Behind Radio Station, Bata Shop, Fraser Road, Patna-800 001, Bihar

Persons who own or carry on the business of management of Newspapers (nominated under clause (b) of sub-section (3) of Section 5)

14. Shri Vijay Kumar Chopra, Punjab Kesari Building, Civil Lines, Jalandhar-144 001, Punjab

Res: ER-129, Pucca Bagh, Jalandhar-144 001 Punjab

15. Shri Sanjay Gupta, From Big Newspapers Dainik Jagran, 501, Category INS Buildings Rafi Marg, New Delhi-110 001

Res: C-26, Friends Colony (East), New Delhi

16. Shri Gurinder Singh, Indian Observer, F-26, Connaught Place, From Medium New Delhi-110 001 Newspapers Category

Res: D-253, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110 024

142 17. Shri Vijay Kumar Chopra, Filmi Duniya, B-10, Shiv Apartments, 7, Raj Narain Marg, Civil Lines, From Medium Newspapers Delhi-110 054 Category

Res: A-7, Sector 33, Noida-201 301, Uttar Pradesh

18. Dr. Ramasubba Iyer Lakshmipathy, “Health”, Professional Publications (P) Ltd. “Lakshmi” 21, Sathya From Small Newspapers Sai Nagar, Madurai-625 003 Category Tamil Nadu

Res: 27, “Shri Ram”, Sathya Sai Nagar, Madurai-625 003, Tamil Nadu

Persons who manage news agencies (nominated under clause (c) of sub- section (3) of section 5)

19. Shri Neeraj Bajpai, United News of India, 9, Rafi Marg, New Delhi- 110 001

Res: 9/60, Judges’ Colony Vaishali, Ghaziabad

Persons having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of Education and Science, Law and Literature and Culture (nominated under clause (d) of sub-section (3) of section 5)

20. Shri Rajeev Sabade, Nominated by University Director, Centre for Media & Grants Commission Publications, YASHADA, Rajbhavan Complex, Baner Road, Pune-411 007

143 21. Shri Milan Kumar Dey, Senior Advocate, Nominated by Bar Chairman, Executive Committee, Council of India Bar Council of India Behind Apsara Hotel, Circular Road, P.O. Lalpur, Ranchi- 834 001, Jharkhand

22. Shri A. Krishna Murthy Present Address: 208, Amrapali Apartments, Nominated by Sahitya I.P. Extension, New Delhi-110 092 Akademi

Permanent Address: S-4, A-Block Shanthiniketan Apartments, Arakere Bengaluru-560 076 Karnataka

Members of Parliament (nominated under clause (e) of sub-section (3) of section 5)

23. Kum. Meenakshi Natarajan, Present Address: 24, Akbar Raod New Delhi

Permanent Address: 23, MIG, Indira Nagar, Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh

24. Shri Harin Pathak Nominated by the Speaker Present Address: 4, South Avenue Lane, of the House of the New Delhi-110 011 People

Permanent Address: “Madhuram” Prankunj Society, Puspkunj, Maninagar, Ahmedabad -380 028

144 25. Shri Sanjay Dina Patil Present Address: Maharashtra Sadan, New Delhi

Permanent Address: Nominated by the Speaker Sanjay Apartments of the House of the People Dina Patil Est., Station Road, Bhandup (W) Mumbai-400 078

26. Shri Rajeev Shukla Present Address: C-I/2, Lodhi Garden, Amrita Sher Gil Marg, New Delhi

Permanent Address: 119/501, Darshan Purwa, Kanpur, Nominated by the Uttar Pradesh- 208012 Chairman of the Council of States 27. Shri Prakash Javadekar Present Address: 24, Mahadev Road, New Delhi-110 001

Permanent Address: 11, Suvan Apartment, Mayur Colony, Kothrud, Pune-411 038 Maharashtra

(F. No. 4/8/2010-Press) KHURSHID AHMED GANAI, Jt. Secy.

145 Annexure - D

The Gazette of India EXTRAORDINARY PART II – Section 3 – Sub-section (ii) PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY No. 1915] NEW DELHI, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2011/ASVINA 13, 1933

MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING NOTIFICATION

S.O. No. 2305(E)— In the exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (2) of Section 5 of the Press Council Act, 1978 (37 of 1978), the Central Government hereby notifies the nomination of Justice Markandey Katju, retired judge of the Supreme Court of India as the Chairman of the Press Council of India.

(F. No. 4/11/2011-Press) KHURSHID AHMED GANAI, Jt. Secy.

146 Annexure - E

Graph of Adjudications 2011-2012

Against the Authorities 22.52%

77.48% Against the Press

*Against the Authorities *Against the Press

36% 41.86% 32%

20% 22.09% 17.44% 18.61% 12%

ABCD ABCD

Foot Note :- A: Upheld B: Rejected C: Assurance/Settled/Amends D: Dropped for Non-pursuance/Sub-judice/Lack of Substance

* Including two matters (one in each category) directly placed before the Council

147 Annexure - F

Report on Visit of Press Freedom Commission of South Africa Delegation on Research Mission to India on 23.11.2011

A delegation of five Executives of Press Freedom Commission of South Africa namely, Ms. Ntombifuthi Mthoba, Business Representative, Prof. Kwame Karikari, International Representative, Ms. Jabulile Malotsane, Administrator, Mr. Mvuyo Mhangwane, Councillor: Political South African High Commission and Mr. Manoj Nair, Information Officer, South African High Commission with a view to explore structure of regulation in print media met Hon’ble Chairman, Mr. Justice Markandey Katju on November 23, 2011 at Indian Law Institute, New Delhi. Shri Shravan Garg, Member, Shri Rajiv Ranjan Nag, Member and Shri S.N. Sinha and Shri Joginder Chawla, former Members, Press Council, Secretary and other officers of Press Council of India were also present. Welcoming the delegates, the Hon’ble Chairman traced the history with the struggle of Father of Nation, Mahatama Gandhi in South Africa which ultimately led to independence of India from foreign yore. Admiring the similar struggle by Shri Nelson Mandela on the issue of apartheid supported by India, the Hon’ble Chairman expressed happiness when South Africa got real independence and democracy. Whereas both the countries are politically free, there are still economic problems, poverty, etc. and media has assumed ideal role which is very important to raise such issue to have a better life. The objective of the visit of the Press Freedom Commission initiated by Print Media South Africa and South African National Editors forum followed heavy criticism of print media coverage and its self regulatory methods, to research on press freedom in support of enhancing democracy, founded on human dignity, equality and freedom and to research the regulation of specifically print media, locally and globally. The delegation also discussed self regulation, co-regulation, independent regulation and state regulation in this meet. During the discussion it was revealed that electronic media is regulated by a statutory body in South Africa and retired Chief Justice heads it.

148 The Secretary of the Council explained the formation of Council since 1966 and the matters relating to its present composition, functioning, objectives, powers, complaint, nomination procedure etc. of the Press Council of India, ethics in media, access to and coverage of government information, training in media education and funding structure of the media industry were discussed in depth. The exchange of the information benefited both the countries giving an insight into the functioning of the media and media regulatory bodies.

149 Annexure - G

Subject Index of Adjudications in Complaints Regarding Threats to Press Freedom (2011-2012)

Sl. Parties Date of Category No. Decision Harassment of Newsmen 1 Complaint of Shri Satish Bhatia, District November 17, Disposed Correspondent, Rashtriya Sahara, District 2011 off being Sonebadra, Uttar Pradesh against anti infructuous social elements and local police authorities. 2 Complaint of Shri Awdesh Singh Patel, ,, Directions Correspondent, , Banda, U.P. against the police authorities. 3 Complaint of the General Secretary, ,, Disposed UT Journalist Union, Daman against off with the police authorities. observations M 4. Complaint of Shri Satish Sharma, ,, Disposed Managing Editor, Savera India Times, off with Nani Daman against the police authorities. observations 5 Complaint of Shri Anurag Srivastava, ,, Advise Correspondent, Swatantra Bharat, Kanpur, U.P. against the Station House Officer, Jalaun, Uttar Pradesh. 6 Complaint of Shri Devender Kumar ,, Caution Sharma, Owner/Publisher/Editor, Weekly issued to Amar Tanav, Hathras, District Mahamaya authorities Nagar, U.P. against Shri S.R. Aditya, Superintendent of Police, S.P. Singh, District Social Welfare Department and Shri Narayan Lal, Agent of District Social Welfare Department.

M-Adjudications Merged

150 Sl. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

7 Complaint of Shri Kamlesh Kumar Jha, March 27, Disposed Correspondent, Dainik Jagran, Samastipur, 2012 off Bihar against Shri Maheshwar Hazari, MLA, Bihar. 8 Complaint of Shri Ram Singh Gautam, ,, Sub-judice Correspondent, Manavta Ki Raksha, Bulandshahar, U.P. against Shri Naveen Mittal, Advocate, Bulandshahar. 9 Complaint of Shri Mukesh Thakur, ,, Dismissed Correspondent, Agni Blast, Monthly Magazine, Indore, Madhya Pradesh against (i) Shri Uma Shankar Gupta, State Home Minister, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal (ii) S.S.P., Indore, (iii) IP&RD Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh. 10 Complaint of Shri , Publisher/ ,, Dismissed Editor, Dholpur Tishan, Dholpur, Rajasthan against the District Administration, Dholpur, Rajasthan. 11 Complaint of Shri B.N. Devdas, Advocate ,, Sub-judice Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu against the Sub- Urban Commissioner, Chennai. 12 Complaint of Shri K. Nagaimugan, Chennai, ,, Sub-judice Tamil Nadu against the police authorities. 13 Suo-motu inquiry on the reported attack ,, Enquiry on the offices of “” and Dropped “Jayakirana” published by the “Hindustan Times”, “The Hindu” and “The Times of India” in their issues dated 3.3.2010.

Facilities to the Press 14 Complaint of Smt. Nazma Begum, November 17, Directions Publisher/Editor, Hindi Dainik Action, 2011 Bhopal, M.P. against the DAVP.

151 Sl. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

15 Complaint of Shri Harjeet Dua, November 17, Disposed Freelancer, Delhi against Directorate 2011 off with of Information & Publicity, Government directions of NCT of Delhi. 16 Complaint of Shri U.S. Singhal, Editor, ,, Matter (PG), Public News (National Newspaper allowed to on Current Affairs) Pitampura, New rest Delhi against Ms. Sushma Gaud, Senior PRO, DMRC, Delhi. 17 Complaint of Shri Amar Singh Johari, ,, Disposed Editor, Akhiri Koshish, Panipat, Haryana off with against the Director, Information & advice Public Relations Department, Government of Haryana, Chandigarh and Chief Election Officer, Haryana, Chandigarh. 18 Complaint of Shri Kamal Bakshi, March 27, Disposed Editor/Publisher, Divye Prabhat, 2012 off with Muzaffarnagar, U.P. against (i) Chief observations Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, (ii) Chief Election Officer, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow and (iii) District Election Officer, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow. 19 Complaint of Shri Ramcharan Mali, ,, Disposed Editor, Vanvasi Express, Baran, Rajasthan off with against the Director, Information & directions Public Relations Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 20 Complaint of Shri Anurag Shukla, ,, Directions Journalist, Satta Express, Kanpur Dehat, Uttar Pradesh against the Director, I&PRD, Lucknow, U.P. 21 Complaint of Shri Vinay Gupta, Chief ,, Directions Secretary, Indian Newspapers and Journalist Association, Pitampura, New Delhi against the Director, I&PRD, Chandigarh, Haryana.

152 Sl. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

22 Complaint of Shri Madan Verma, Editor, March 27, Dismissed Good Haryana, Jind, Haryana against 2012 the Director, I&PRD, Chandigarh and Cultural Affairs Department, Government of Haryana, Chandigarh. 23 Complaint of Mohd. Abdul Azeem, ,, Disposed off Freelance Journalist, Hyderabad against the Director, Public Relations Officer, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. 24 Complaint of Shri P.V. Ramana Rao, ,, Dismissed Correspondent, PTI, Guntur, A.P. against the District Public Relations Officer, Guntur.

153 Annexure - H

Subject Index of Adjudications in Complaints Filed Against the Press (2011-2012)

Sl. Parties Date of Category No. Decision Principles and Publication 1 Complaint of Shri Amar Kumar Singh, November 17, Dismissed Head, Department of English, SKM 2011 University, Dumka, Jharkhand against the Editor, 2 Complaint Shri Navdeep Singh Virk, ,, Closed for IPS, Additional Superintendent of non-pursuance Police, Sonipat, Haryana against the Editor, Amar Ujala, Noida, U.P. 3 Complaint of Shri Shiv Kumar ,, Regret Faizabadi, Secretary, Jagruk Nagrik Published- Manch, Faizabad, U.P. against the editor, Matter Maya Avadh, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh closed 4 Complaint of Shri Ashok Coomar, ,, Disposed Maj. Gen (Retd.) Bhopal, Madhya off with Pradesh against the editor, The Hindustan observations Times, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. 5 Complaint of Shri M.K. Bainiwal, ,, Dismissed for New Delhi against the Editor, lack of The Hindu, Tamil Nadu M substance 6 Complaint of Shri M.K. Bainiwal, ,, Dismissed for New Delhi against the Editor, lack of Hindustan, New Delhi substance 7 Complaint of Shri N.B. Mani, Under ,, Closed for Secretary, Technology Department non-pursuance Board, Ministry of Science and Technology, New Delhi against the Editor, Rashtriya Sahara, Dehradun M-Adjudications Merged

154 Sl. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

8 Complaint of Shri Chander Bhushan March 27, Dismissed Sharma, Principal, S.S. College, 2012 Shastri Nagar, Jehanabad, Bihar against the Editor, Rashtriya Sahara, Patna 9 Complaint of Shri V.M. Bedse, ,, Disposed Nasik, Maharashtra against the off with Editor, , Mumbai directions/ observations M 10 Complaint of Shri V.M. Bedse, ,, Disposed Nasik, Maharashtra against the off with Editor, , Pune directions/ observations 11 Complaint of Shri V.M. Bedse, ,, Dismissed Nasik, Maharashtra against the Editor, Maharashtra Times, Mumbai 12 Complaint of Dr. Zora Singh, Chairman, ,, Rejected Desh Bhagat Group of Institutes, Chandigarh against the Editor, The Times of India, Chandigarh 13 Complaint of Shri Nungsanglemba, AO, ,, Dismissed JDPR, Directorate of Public Relations, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi against the Editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan 14 Complaint of Shri S.V. Mani, ,, Closed Journalist/Writer, Chennai against the Editor, The Times of India, Bangaluru M 15. Complaint of Shri S.V. Mani, ,, Disposed off Journalist/Writer, Chennai against the Editor, The Times of India, Mumbai

155 S. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

16 Complaint of Shri R. Manohar, Head March 27, Directions Programmes, South India Cell for 2012 Human Rights Education and Monitoring, Bangalore against the Editor, The Times of India, Bangaluru M 17. Complaint of Shri R. Manohar, Head ,, Directions Programmes, South India Cell for Human Rights Education and Monitoring, Bangalore against the Editor, Deccan Chronicle, Bangaluru 18 Complaint of Ch. V. Suryanarayana, ,, Closed Secunderabad, A.P. against the Editor, The New Indian Express, Hyderabad

Press and Defamation

19 Complaint of Shri Anil Kumar November 17, Reprimanded Kamal, Bijnor, U.P. against 2011 the Editor, Bijnor Times, Bijnor, U.P.

20 Complaint of Shri Anil Kumar ,, Reprimanded Kamal, Bijnor, U.P. against the Editor, Chingari Bijnor, U.P. M 21 Complaint of Shri Anil Kumar ,, Reprimanded Kamal, Bijnor, U.P. against the Editor, Shah Times, Muzaffarnagar, U.P.

22 Complaint of Shri Anil ,, Reprimanded Kumar Kamal, Bijnor, U.P. against the Editor, Royal Bulletin, Muzaffarnagar, U.P.

156 S. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

23 Complaint of Shri A.T.M. November 17, No action Rangaramanujam, Senior Advocate, 2011 Supreme Court of India, Delhi against the Editor, , Andhra Pradesh M 24 Complaint of Shri A.T.M. ,, Directions Rangaramanujam, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India, Delhi against the Editor, , Andhra Pradesh 25 Complaint of Shri D.N. Nagendra Jois, ,, Disposed Shimoga, Karnataka against the Editor, off for Lakshmeesha Patrike non-pursuance 26 Complaint of Dr. Padmaja Jayaram, ,, Cautioned Anuradha Nursing Home, Shimoga District, Karnataka against the Editor, Lakshmeesha Patrike, Kannada Weekly 27 Complaint of Shri Ashok Nath, ,, Rejoinder Library and Information Officer, Published Assistant National Library, Kolkata against the Editor, Ananda Bazaar Patrika, Kolkata. M 28 Complaint of Shri Ashok Nath, ,, Rejoinder Library and Information Officer, Published Assistant National Library, Kolkata against the Editor, The Telegraph, Kolkata 29 Complaint of Admiral Arun Prakash ,, Disposed (Retd.), Goa against the Editor, off with Outlook Magazine, New Delhi Directions 30 Complaint of Ms. Rita Sen, Principal, ,, Admonished Delhi Public School, Delhi against the Editor, , New Delhi.

157 S. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

31 Complaint of Shri Devi Ram through Novermber 17, Admonished his advocate Shri Tejbir S. Ahlawat, 2011 Rohtak, Haryana against the Editor, Dainik Jagran, Noida, U.P.

32 Complaint of the Secretary, Rajdhani ,, Closed for Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd., Lucknow, non-pursuance U.P. (through advocate Shri Ashutosh Pandey) against the Editor, Lokdrishti, Lucknow, U.P.

33 Complaint of Shri R.P. Mishr, Accounts ,, Censured Officer, Uttar Pradesh Handicapped University, Chitrakoot Dham against the Editor, Prakhar Vichar/Patrika, Astha, Lucknow, U.P.

34 Complaint of Shri Upender Kumar ,, Closed for Agarwal, IPS, Superintendent of Police, non-pursuance Railways against the Editor, Aaj, U.P.

35 Complaint of Shri Jagdish Prasad, ,, Closed for Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh against the non-pursuance Editor, Amar Ujala, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh.

36 Shri Riyaz Ahmed Khan, District ,, Withdrawn President, District Congress Committee (through advocate S. Zulfekar Hasnain Naqvi) against the Editor, Dainik Jagran, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh.

37 Complaint of Dr. Vinod Kumar Rai, ,, Dismissed Chairman & Managing Director, R.R. Memorial Surgical Centre Pvt. Ltd., Sonebhadra, U.P. against the Editor, Namantar, Hindi Monthly, Lucknow, U.P.

158 S. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

38 Complaint of Maulana Amir Rashadi November 17, Warned Madani, Nazim, Jameat-Ur-Rashad 2011 Madrsa, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh against the Editor, Aaj, , Uttar Pradesh 39 Complaint of Mohd. Moteen Khan, ,, Closed for Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track non-pursuance Court - II, Shrawasti, Uttar Pradesh against the Editor, Dainik Hindustan 40 Complaint of Shri Braham Kumar ,, Disposed Trimurti, Manager, Khadi off with Karamchari/Shramik Kalyan Samiti, directions Ambedkarnagar, Uttar Pradesh against the Editor, Janmorcha, U.P. 41 Complaint of Shri Suman Dhagra, ,, Disposed Chairman, Shri Digmber Jain Panchayat off with Mandir Beawar, Rajasthan against directions the Editor, Dictator, Beawar, Rajasthan 42 Complaint of Shri P. P. Kapoor, ,, Withdrawn Haryana State Convener, Labour Union, District-Panipat, Haryana against the Editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Panipat, Haryana 43 Complaint of Shri R.D. Rahi, Executive ,, Disposed off Engineer, Public Works Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Hardoi against the Editor, Dainik Aaj 44 Complaint of Shri Satyendra Veer Singh, ,, Withdrawn Superintendent of Police, Sultanpur, Uttar Pradesh against the Editor, Dainik Jagran, Sultanpur, Uttar Pradesh 45 Complaint of Shri G.N.K. Tomar, ,, Closed Chief General Director, All India Bank Recovery Rapid Action Force, Noida M against the Editor, Dainik Jagran New Delhi

159 S. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

46 Complaint of Shri G.N.K. Tomar, November 17, Closed Chief General Director, All India 2011 Bank Recovery Rapid Action Force, M Noida against the Editor, Amar Ujala, New Delhi 47 Complaint of Shri Sandeep Kumar ,, Directions Verma, Chief Train Tickets Examiner, Railway Station, Haridwar, Uttrakhand against the Editor, Dainik Jagran, , Uttar Pradesh 48 Complaint of Dr. Ram Sharma, ,, Proceedings Lecturer, Meerut Cannt, (through dropped advocate), Uttar Pradesh against the Editor, Amar Ujala, Meerut Cantt, U.P. 49 Complaint of Shri Abhiram Das, ,, Censured Balasore, Orissa against the Editor, Khabar, Balasore, Orissa 50 Complaint of Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, March 27, Dismissed Deputy Superintendent of 2012 Education-Cum-Regional Education Officer, Banipur, Darbhanga, Bihar against the Editor, Hindustan, Muzaffarnagar, Bihar 51 Complaint of Shri S. Kamaraju, Taluk & ,, Censured District - Parambalur, Tamil Nadu, against the Editor, Vilmurasu Monthly Magazine, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 52 Complaint of Kumari Neelam Gupta, ,, Disposed Aligarh against the Editor, off with Akinchan Bharat directions/ M observation 53 Complaint of Kumari Neelam Gupta, ,, Disposed Aligarh against the Editor, Dainik off with Hindustan directions/ observation

160 S. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

54 Complaint of Shri M.S. Bitta, Chairman, March 27, Disposed off All India Anti - Terrorist Front, New 2012 Delhi against Shri Viresh Shandilya, Chief Editor, Dainik Jyotikan, Ambala 55 Complaint of Shri Om Parkash, Under ,, Dismissed Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilizers, Department of Pharmaceuticals, National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority, New Delhi against the Editor, Medicare News Fortnightly, Rohtak, Haryana 56 Complaint of Shri Lakshmi Vardhan ,, Sub-judice Sharma, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh against the Editor, Amar Ujala, Uttar Pradesh 57 Complaint of Shri Navin H. Pandya, ,, Dismissed Malad East, Mumbai against the Editor, The Economic Times, Mumbai 58 Complaint of Shri Deoraj Singh Patel, ,, Dismissed MP (Lok Sabha) against the Editor, Praja Taj, Rewa, Madhya Pradesh 59 Complaint of Shri Nilotpal Basu, ,, Dismissed Member, Communist Party of India, New Delhi against the Editor, The Economics Times, New Delhi 60 Complaint of Shri Diwan Singh, Election ,, Dismissed Agent, Bhiwani, Haryana against the Editor, Abhi - Abhi, Hissar, Haryana 61 Complaint of Shri Jagdish Verma, ,, Dismissed Private Secretary to the Minister of Education, Government of Himachal Pradesh, District Shimla against the Editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh

161 S. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

62 Complaint of Shri Anil Dawra, IPS, March 27, Dismissed Additional Director General of Police, 2012 (CID) Chandigarh against the Editor, The Times of India, Chandigarh 63 Complaint of Shri R. Sathasivam, ,, Dismissed Madurai, Tamil Nadu against the Editor, , Madurai, Tamil Nadu 64 Complaint of Smt. K. Jayalakshmi, ,, Censured District - Karur, Tamil Nadu against the Editor, Kumudam Reporter, Magazine, Chennai 65 Complaint of Shri H.N. Krishnamurthy, ,, Closed Tudki Village, Shimoga, Karnataka against the Editor, Varadi Shimoga, Karnataka 66 Complaint of Shri H.M. Mahabala ,, Closed Bhatt, Thirthahalli, Shimoga District Karnataka against the Editor, Vidhatha, Thirthahalli, District Shimoga, Karnataka 67 Complaint of Shri M.G. Yathish, ,, Dismissed General Secretary, Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, Technical Officers Associations (Regd.) Bangaluru against the Editor, Parisara Malinya, Bangaluru, Karnataka 68 Complaint of Shri M. , ,, Disposed off Convenor, Association of Concerned and Informed Citizens of Mysore against the Editor, Srinath Patrike, Kannada Fortnightly, Mysore 69 Complaint of Shri Abdul Kalam Azad, ,, Closed National Gold Palace, Shimoga District, Karnataka against the Editor, Lakshmeesha Patrike, Kannada Weekly, Karnataka

162 S. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

70 Complaint of Dr. G. N. Shivanna Reddy, March 27, Admonished/ District Health Officer & F.W. Officer, 2012 Censured Karwar, (Uttra Kannada) Karnataka against the Editor, Karavali Munjavu, Karwar, Karnataka 71 Complaint of Shri Nithyananda ,, Censured Dhyanapeetam, Bangaluru against the Editor, The New Indian Express, Bangaluru, Karnataka 72. Complaint of Shri Nithyananda ,, Censured Dhyanapeetam, Bangaluru against the Editor, Mid Day, Bangaluru 73 Complaint of Shri Nithyananda ,, Censured Dhyanapeetam, Bangaluru against M the Editor, Deccan Herald, Bangaluru 74 Complaint of Shri Nithyananda ,, Censured Dhyanapeetam, Bangaluru against the Editor, “DNA”, Bangalore 75 Complaint of Shri Nithyananda ,, Censured Dhyanapeetam, Bangaluru against the Editor, Dainik Jagran, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh 76 Complaint of Shri K. Sudhakar, ,, Censured District Panchayat Officer Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh against the Editor, Varadhi Daily, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh 77 Complaint of Dr. P. Subba Reddy, ,, No action Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh against warranted the Editor, M 78 Complaint of Dr. P. Subba Reddy, ,, No action Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh against warranted the Editor, Sakshi, Andhra Pradesh

163 S. Parties Date of Category No. Decision

79 Complaint of Shri Krishna Rao Patra, March 27, Dismissed District Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh 2012 against the Editor, , Andhra Pradesh 80 Complaint of Shri Krishna Rao Patra, ,, Dismissed District Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh against the Editor, Andhra Jyothi, Andhra Pradesh M 81 Complaint of Shri Krishna Rao Patra, ,, Dismissed District Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh against the Editor, Sakshi, Vishakhapatnam

Press and Morality 82 Complaint of Shri Jayanta Deka and November 17, Advise others, Mangaldai, District Court, 2011 Assam against the Editor, , , Assam 83 Complaint of Smt. Suprita S. Amin, March 27, Dismissed Principal, MICE, Udupi (through 2012 the Deputy Commissioner of Udupi, ) Karnataka against the Editor, India Today, New Delhi

Communal, Casteist and Anti National Writings 84 Complaint of Col. Sanjay Dikshit, November 17, Agrees to Northern Command GS (IW) against 2011 Publish Editor, , Jammu, Rebuttal Srinagar 85 Complaint of Shri D. Venkatesan, March 27, Dropped with Chennai against the Editor, Outlook, 2012 observations Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi

164 Annexure - I

Index of Principles Recorded in Adjudications in Complaints Regarding Threats to Press Freedom

Facilities to the Press It is the duty of the authorities not to harass the small newspapers and as trustee of public money, it is essential to bring transparency in action of the government so that the decisions are fair and just vis-à-vis similarly placed newspapers and the power not be used as retaliation or placatory measure. (Smt. Najma Begam, Editor/Publisher, Hindi Dainik Action, Bhopal, M.P. versus the Directorate of Advertisement and Visual Publicity, Complaint No. 6, PCI Review, January, 2012) It is understandable if a person is held guilty and punished by the court for a criminal offence and denied access to accreditation, but the mere factum of registration of an FIR cannot lead to inference of his guilt. In a profession like journalism, such provisions could provide an opportunity to force the journalists reason to complain to the powers that be and interfere with the free functioning of the press. (Shri Harjeet Dua, Freelancer, Delhi versus The Chief Secretary, Government of NCT of Delhi and Directorate of Information and Publicity, Government of NCT of Delhi, Complaint No. 7, PCI Review, January, 2012)

165 Annexure - J

Index of Principles Recorded in Adjudications in Complaints Filed Against the Press

Principles and Publication Selection of material for publication of report/article/letters lies within the discretion of the editor and the Press Council cannot be used as a medium or tool to force the editor to carry an information. (Shri V.M. Bedse, Nasik, Maharashtra versus The Editors (i) Loksatta, Mumbai, (ii) Maharashtra Times, Mumbai and (iii) Sakal, Pune, Complaint No. 16, PCI Review, April, 2012)

Press and Defamation The newspapers are expected to serve the readers with news, views/ comments and information on matters in an unbiased and dignified manner. They are expected to exercise due care and caution and timing of any news report that could jeopardise, the career progression of a person and ought to tone down the language that might create sensationalism. (Shri Ashok Nath, Assistant Library and Information Officer, National Library, Kolkata versus The Editors (i) Ananda Bazar Patrika and (ii) The Telegraph, Kolkata, Complaint No. 20, PCI Review, January, 2012) The ethical standards on caution against defamatory writings requires that the newspapers and journals should not publish anything which is manifestly defamatory or libellous against any individual unless after due care and verification, there is reason/evidence to believe that it is true and its publication will be for public good. (Shri S. Kamaraju, Perambalur Taluk and District, Tamil Nadu versus The Editor, Vilmurasu Monthly Magazine, Chennai, Complaint No. 24, PCI Review, April, 2012) The parameter of the right of the press to comment on the acts and conduct of the public officials, local authority or any other organ/institution, allow the press to make fair criticism. Therefore, such bodies cannot bring charge of defamation for reports critical of their act. (National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA), Department of Pharmaceuticals, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, Government of India, New Delhi versus The Editor, Medicare News Fortnightly, Rohtak, Haryana, Complaint No. 27, PCI Review, April, 2012)

166 Press and Morality The newspaper must be sensitive to public morality and decency as such publication may deprave and corrupt the young minds. (Shri Jayant Deka and others, Assam versus The Editor, Asomiya Pratidin, Assam, Complaint No. 41, PCI Review, January, 2012)

Anti National Writing Press in the Kashmir valley has a specific job i.e. to be conduit between the army, administration and the people. A newspaper cannot publish anything be it an article or opinion pertaining to an individual which will have detrimental repercussions in the relationship of various sections of authority and public and disturb the basic fabric of trust, whereas whole system cannot be blamed, details of the Army personnel involved in investigative cases and on completing of investigation, exemplary punished, given could be published. Therefore, any such publication should be shouldered with the responsibility to rectify it and it is advisable that the newspaper always has a balanced view of both ends, analyses the ramifications of its reporting/publishing of articles. (Col. Sanjay Dikshit, Colonel General Staff, Northern Comd GS (IW), C/o 56 APO versus The Editor, Greater Kashmir, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, Complaint No. 42, PCI Review, January, 2012)

167 Annexure - K

Subject Index of Orders Passed by the Press and Registration Appellate Board (2011-2012)

S. Name of Parties Date of Order No. Order Passed 1. Appeal of Shri Bikash Swain, Owner/ 23.8.2011 Set-aside the Publisher, Suryaprava, Oriya daily, impugned Bhubaneshwar, Orissa against order order dated 8.9.2009 passed by District Magistrate, Khorda, Orissa regarding cancellation of declaration. 2. Appeal of Ms. Geeta Handa, Karol Bagh, 23.8.2011 Not-admitted Delhi versus order dated 22.3.2011 passed by Registrar of Newspapers for India, New Delhi. 3. Appeal of Shri Mansukhbhai Gangashanker 23.8.2011 Not-admitted Raval, District Amreli, Gujarat versus order dated 2.11.2010 passed by Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Amreli, Gujarat. 4. Review Application of President/Secretary, 15.3.2012 Dismissed Maha Gujarat Dashnam Goswami Mahamandal, Gujarat with reference to order dated 7.8.2009 of Press and Registration Appellate Board on appeal of Shri Bipingiri K Goswami, Editor, Goswami Prakash and Shri Baldevgiri M. Goswami, Secretary, Shri Mahagujarat Dashnam Goswami Mahamandal, Gandhinagar, Gujarat versus order dated 17.7.2008 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gandhinagar, Gujarat- Intervention application of Shri Baldevgiri M Goswami.

q

168