Trial by Media in India

Trial by Media in India

Author: Rupa Paul, Amity University, Kolkata.

Abstract

The media has been a major source of freedom of information, freedom of speech, and expression. However, the media is also one of the worst offenders of privacy rights through investigative journalism. The Constitution of India guarantees that a fundamental right is guaranteed in terms of a legal obligation and not as a political right. There are basic human rights and have been interpreted as political, economic, social, and cultural rights. Encouraging words in honor of the Indian Constitution begin to give a clear idea of ​​the freedom of thought and expression within the liberty. One article saw the importance of freedom as it has always been the fundamental rights of the Constitution as the term Liberals comes after justice and before equality in the Preamble and, it seems, is in line with John Rawls’ twin policy. Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution of India provides for freedom of speech and expression. Media freedom can be found under this heading.

Introduction:

Participating media is considered the ‘foundation stone’ of our democracy. The media serves as a facilitator and a liberator on many issues including those that affect the conscience of the public. To name a few, such as the Priyadarshini Mattoo case, the case of Jessica Lal ,and the recent Tehelka case. While the media on a large scale plays an undeniable role, the role of the media in media experiments specifically on sex is questionable. Sensational journalism is a reality for the media industry, due to TRP’s clear details of the national case being disclosed in a public place leading to the enforcement of the Right to Privacy or the improper disqualification of a suspect.

In the famous case of Khurshid Anwar, the media (India TV) claimed that Mr. Anwar was a rapist based on the victim’s account, which led to his suicide. This has led to discussions on the sanctity of the law reporting on media investigations into election case cases. The principle of criminal proceedings – “not guilty until proven guilty” – must be understood by the media, as the verdict of not guilty or innocence is appropriate to be tried. This paper will discuss in more detail the role of media activists and the legal implications such as including victim privacy, disputes over repetition in the public domain, denial of a right to a hearing, recognition of public discrimination based on non-evidence, and interventions in the sentencing process.

An Indian court ruled that this freedom included the freedom of the Media in publishing and broadcasting. In LIC V. Manubhai Shah (1992) 3 SCC637, the Supreme Court further stated that freedom of speech and speech (19 (1) (a) must be broadly construed, including the freedom to circulate a single view of oral speech, or in writing or on visual audio media. The court stated that “freedom of expression is fundamental to the institution of democracy and that any attempt to strengthen it is difficult or ineffective.”

In the Delhi crime scandal popularly known as the ‘Nirbhaya case’ the media took on the role of an activist but reported cases of sexual harassment recklessly. The recent NUJS case and the Tehelka case are some of the cases in which the media has become a self-publishing system by labeling and making illegal allegations. One of the articles on ‘trial and error’ made this clear: – “Part of the Delhi December 2012 criminal legacy is the media that has become an activist and the cause of public opposition to such crimes. No matter how well-intentioned, recent reports of sexual violence have sprung up in a series of experiments by the media, the media, and the public at the expense of the judge and the judge. emphasized the need for justice”.

The media has been a major source of freedom of information, freedom of speech, and expression. However, the media is also one of the worst offenders of privacy rights through investigative journalism. The Constitution of India guarantees that a fundamental right is guaranteed in terms of a legal obligation and not as a political right. There are basic human rights and have been interpreted as political, economic, social, and cultural rights. Encouraging words in honor of the Indian Constitution begin to give a clear idea of ​​the freedom of thought and expression within the liberty. One article saw the importance of freedom as it has always been the fundamental rights of the Constitution as the term Liberals comes after justice and before equality in the Preamble and, it seems, is in line with John Rawls’ twin policy. Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution of India provides for freedom of speech and expression. Media freedom can be found under this heading.

An Indian court ruled that this freedom included the freedom of the Media in publishing and broadcasting. In LIC V. Manubhai Shah (1992) 3 SCC637, the Supreme Court further stated that freedom of speech and speech (19 (1) (a) must be broadly construed, including the freedom to circulate a single view of oral speech, or in writing or on visual audio media. The court stated that “freedom of expression is fundamental to the institution of democracy and that any attempt to strengthen it is difficult or ineffective.”

Conclusion:

Existing rules for regulating electronic media in India are inadequate in regulation. Individuals participating in Electronic Media may need to go to various departments or services to obtain licenses. At the same time, the fine is very small compared to the amount involved in Electronic Media. A new law will be enacted in the area. As you grow older the new law will be in the form of Electronic Media Code which contains Broadcasting, Telecommunication, and the Internet. The rule of law must be overcome and the authority on freedom of communication must be regarded as limited to placing the issue in the public’s attention without giving due consideration. The Court is the appropriate forum for these decisions and these forums should be allowed to operate without spreading prejudice from public opinion. The right to a free and fair trial under Section 21 of the Constitution of India must be upheld.

Suggestions:

1. There is a need for self-regulatory and regulatory authorities that have the power to regulate the coverage of opposing material, and it is, therefore, suggested that regulatory legislation should have a framework in this regard.

2. Regulations may be introduced to ensure the independence of the state-owned media.

3. The legislative or constitutional amendments required by the Judiciary Act to ensure media freedom.

4. The need for comprehensive guidelines for reporting on research items.

5. It is also suggested that the code of conduct should be assigned to a specific function and the obligations of Media staff.

6. For Media accountability to work better, existing self-regulation needs to be strengthened, and standardized and full Media must be introduced to all types of media.

7. There should be regular training of media personnel, especially journalists, to avoid human rights violations, human rights, and privacy.

8. By finding the same curricular for media workers i.e. Journalists print and electronically both, the Press Council of India needs to be strengthened. This regulatory authority must work on the line of the Bar Council of India or the Medical Council of India to set the rules of the framework.

References:

1)Del Vecchio, Philosophy of Law, (1953), The Catholic University of American Press, Washington, D C.

2) D K Sen, A Comparative Study of Indian Constitution, Vol.2, (1966), Orient Longmans, New Delhi. Durga Das Basu, Law of the Press, (2002) Wadhwa Nagpur. Erwin Chemerinsky, Constitutional Law, (2006), Aspen Publishers.

3) John Foley, The Media and Law, Times Mirror Press, 1977.

4) Julius Stone, Human Law and Human Justice, Indian Reprint,(2004) Universal Law Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Co.

5) NE Simmonds, Central Issues in Jurisprudence: Justice, Law and Rights, (2003), Eastern Book Company, Lucknow.

6) Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, (1991), Cambridge University Press.

7) V R Krishna Iyer, Human Rights and the Law, Vedpal Law House, 1984.

8)Samuel Warren, Louis D Brandeis The Right to Privacy HARVARD LAW REVIEW, volume 193 Posted: 1890.

9)Tara Sinha Television Comes of Age Seminar, volume 390 Posted: 1992-02.

10)Wesley Newcomb, Hohfeld Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning Yale Law Journal, volume 16.