oppn parties Test Channels Ban Legally, Do Not Spread Anarchy

News Snippets

  • Supreme Court questions the continuing relevance of two-child norms. The Court observed that falling fertility rates have weakened the population-control rationale behind laws disqualifying people with more than two children from contesting local body elections. It referred the issue to a larger Bench for consideration
  • Supreme Court declines to shift Tirupati laddu case outside Andhra Pradesh. The Court rejected a plea seeking transfer of the trial, despite arguments that political statements by Andhra Pradesh's Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister could affect the fairness of proceedings
  • Supreme Court transfers Azam Khan's fresh ED bail plea to Allahabad High Court. The apex court declined to consider the Samajwadi Party leader's bail request in a fresh Enforcement Directorate case and directed that it be listed before a division Bench of the High Court on November 16
  • Two killed in Delhi building collapse; contractor booked. Two bodies were recovered after a building collapsed in Chawri Bazaar. Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta said the contractor had been booked and the concerned junior and assistant engineers suspended
  • Uttar Pradesh voter rolls show a 2.4-crore discrepancy. A difference of approximately 2.4 crore names has been reported between the state's panchayat and rural Assembly voter lists. The Election Commission has ordered the two sets of rolls to be matched
  • Gujarat announces 3% dearness allowance hike. The state government announced a three-percentage-point increase in dearness allowance for government employees and pensioners ahead of Diwali
  • Sensex and Nifty post their strongest single-day gains in months. The Sensex surged 2,008.61 points, or 2.60%, to close at 79,310.01, while the Nifty 50 climbed 576 points, or 2.40%, to 24,536.60. Financial and automobile stocks led the rally, supported by falling crude prices and renewed foreign investor buying
  • Maaya Rajeshwaran reaches WTA-level quarter-final. The 17-year-old Indian defeated Poland's Weronika Falkowska 6-4, 6-3, becoming the first Indian woman since Sania Mirza in 2012 to reach a quarter-final at a WTA Tour-level singles event
  • Tanvi Patri reaches Youth Olympics badminton final. The 15-year-old defeated Japan's Yuzuno Watanabe in the semi-final, assuring India of a medal and becoming the first Indian badminton player to reach the girls' singles final at the Youth Olympics
  • India beat Pakistan 3-2 in SAFF Championship. India defeated Pakistan in a closely contested match, having led 3-0 before conceding two late goals. The victory was reported as a significant result for India's second-string side
  • India beat Japan 4-1 to win a record sixth Asian Champions Trophy. India recovered from an early deficit to defeat Japan in the final at Mohali, extending its record as the tournament's most successful men's team
  • The Supreme Court issued notice to the Centre and the Election Commission on a petition challenging Section 16 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, which grants the CEC and Election Commissioners protection from legal proceedings for acts performed in their official duties. The petition argues that such blanket immunity could leave citizens without an effective remedy for alleged wrongdoing by the Commission
  • The Supreme Court told voters whose names were deleted from Delhi's draft electoral rolls not to be apprehensive about seeking re-enrolment through Form 6, after the Election Commission assured it that such applicants would not be prosecuted merely because their names had appeared in earlier rolls
  • Congress leader Rahul Gandhi opened the party's campaign for the 2027 Punjab Assembly elections with an Insaaf rally in Sangrur, Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann's home district, accusing the AAP government of failing to control drugs, gangster violence and corruption. Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge outlined six commitments, including a drug-free Punjab, protection of farmers, employment for young people and action against corruption
  • Rahul Gandhi accused the AAP government of running Punjab through a remote control from Delhi and questioned Bhagwant Mann's ability to tackle drug abuse, making personal allegations about the Chief Minister's conduct during their time together in Parliament
Stock markets on fire due to US results, Sensex gains 2008 points to reach its highest level in 8 months
oppn parties
Test Channels Ban Legally, Do Not Spread Anarchy

By Slogger
First publised on 2016-11-07 19:46:15

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Holding an extreme view and carting the ball out of the park is what interests him most. He is a hard hitter at all times. Fasten your seatbelts and read.
The protest against banning of two television channels – NDTV India and News Time Assam – has gained momentum with several bodies and some politicians (including Arvind Kejriwal) calling for all the channels to suspend broadcast from midnight of November 8 to midnight of November 9 to show solidarity with the banned channels. This means that all those calling for such a response think that laws are just made to be published in the official gazette and legal tomes. They are not to be followed by the citizens and enforced by the government, especially if such laws are enacted to regulate the media. This is a very absurd stand. The government has not done anything arbitrarily or in a partisan manner. Rule 6(1)(p) exists in the statute books. If a channel violates it, should the government look the other way? Then what was the use of inserting the rule? The media in India is reasonable most of the times, except when it thinks that efforts are being made to muzzle it. Then, it loses all sense of propriety and supports those among it who break the law of the country. Then, instead of being only the fourth pillar of democracy, it starts to think of itself as the only pillar.

NDTV India is guilty of violating the rule by pinpointing the location of the ammunition depot at the Pathankot air base and also broadcasting that some of the terrorists were just 100 metres away from the depot. Now NDTV India has a huge footprint worldwide. The handlers of the terrorists were probably scanning Indian news channels. The terrorists had mobile phones. Put two plus two together and you don’t need to be in the Army or be a trained security person to imagine what mischief that information could have done. If the bosses at NDTV say that they were not aware of the rule, firstly they need to be informed that ignorance of law is no excuse to escape punishment and secondly, if they are not aware of the legal bindings of their profession, they have no business to run a news channel. Their stated excuse that the print media and other channels were also publishing or broadcasting the same story is not as much an excuse as a damning admission of guilt. NDTV India admits that it broadcast what the government is punishing it for. It only disputes the punishment. But if the rule exists and if punishment is prescribed for violating it, NDTV India’s admission of violating the rule itself makes it liable for punishment.

If we take the News Time case, we have to go back in the past to see that many other channels were hauled up for similar or even lesser violations of the Programme Code and handed out stricter punishments. The picture accompanying this article shows that AXN was taken off the air for 2 months in January 2005 for screening a programme deemed ‘obscene.’ FTV was handed a similar punishment in March 2005 for another ‘obscene’ programme. Why didn’t the protestors come out of the woodwork then? Of course it was the Left-supported and ‘socialist’ UPA ruling at the Centre then and it was being advised by the same set of people who are in the forefront of the protests now. One is sure that if the same was to happen now, the Left intelligentsia would cry that the Centre is being prude and is following the RSS agenda. Why have one set of ethical standard for the bans under UPA and another set for NDA? Similarly, why have different ethical standards for entertainment channels and news channels? If the Programme Code is violated, be it by an entertainment channel or by a news channel, the punishment prescribed must be applied. Otherwise, burn the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and the Programme Code and give a free run to the media.

The media had allowed the UPA government to enact the above act. The print publications knew it was discriminatory and did not provide for a level playing field. Yet the media bodies, where print publications rule the roost, did not challenge it in the courts. Hence, there are different set of rules for the channels and they can be hauled up for broadcasting the same story that a print publication can get away with. If Venkaiah Naidu says that the current protests are politically motivated, he is partially correct as the law of the land has been broken and until there is an independent regulatory authority, it is the government that is going to decide who broke the rules and how it will punish it as per law. That is the job of the government and its agencies. The government is just doing its job. NDTV has appealed against the ban in the Supreme Court. In a democratic country, that is the best way to find out whether the government is acting arbitrarily or whether it has based its order on sound legal principles. Till the time the apex court decides on the matter, those supporting the channels that broke the law should refrain from creating an unholy racket.