MEDIA TRIAL
“I am a great lover of the press, a great lover of freedom of speech and expression but pluralizes your limits.’’
– Ram Jethmalani
ABSTRACT
Since the British India media plays an important role in every sphere. media is regarded as the fourth pillar of our democratic system after the legislature, the executive and judiciary. It is supposed to play a crucial role as a watchdog of our society. Earlier media has the power to change the world now media confine itself to spreading and limiting the people’s mindset to hatred and gives its own discretion about anything before the court’s discretion. Media becomes a kangaroo court, forgets its power with the passing of time, and becomes a puppet of political power. It plays important role in moulding the opinion of people.
Every aspect of an accused’s personal life and character which have nothing to do legally with the investigation of any crime is under the public lens of scrutiny via the media trial. The centric point of submission focuses on Freedom only to give the right information but the media is only working for TRP and is working one step away from the court. “Is the media expected to be a silent spectator and insensitive to the happenings around and failing to quench the public curiosity about the case?”. Certainly not, but the question is how far the media can go. This will be answered later in the course of this Article.
INTRODUCTIONS
The word “Media trial” is not directly defined anywhere. But indirectly, this power is being given to the media under Article 19 provides freedom of speech and Expression to each and every person. Media has an important role in the democratic process. It provides valuable information to the government, the public at large. In the last few years, there has been a tremendous growth of media in the country in the form of print and electronic media. Its coverage of the trial process has increased tremendously. The media can be commended for starting a trend where it plays an active role in bringing the accused to the hook.
Thus, “trial” ordinarily means a proceeding before a Court of justice. If so, there cannot be a trial by the media. But these words are often used to denote an exercise undertaken by the media virtually taking up the role of a judicial forum for which such exercise has been earmarked by the laws of the land.
As it is rightly observed by the Hon’ble Justice M.K Mukherjee and D.P. Wadhwa that “A trial by press, electronic media or public agitation is very antithesis of the rule of law. It can well lead to miscarriage of justice”.
The expression “Media Trial” itself is a misnomer. The word “trial” has not been defined either by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“C.P.C.” for short) or the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.” for short) which are the basic statues governing the trial of civil and criminal cases by the respective courts in India. Black’s Law Dictionary (9th Edition) gives the word “trial” the following meaning:- “a formal judicial examination of evidence and determination of legal claims in an adversary proceeding”. Sec. 2(7) of the Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891 defines the word “trial” as “trial means any hearing before the Court at which evidence is taken”.
THE RIGHT PILLARS OF MEDIA
The media also plays important role in reducing white-collar crime by wealthy industrialist, corrupt officials, and famous personalities by greasing official’s palms and also plays an essential role in excavating the government’s huge scams. It has played an important role in shaping people’s minds and made a tremendous influence on people’s perceptions sometimes by making them aware and sometimes by putting blindfolds on their eyes and by showing the fake and prejudice of a person or things but one cannot deny in some cases where media shows its honest work by getting criminals to justice in many cases, such as Jessica Lal murder case, Priyadarshini Mitto Rape Case, Nitish Katara murder case. Due to the involvement of media the (Betting & Fixing row) by IPL Match came into the public conscience. In such situations, media played an affirmative role.
THE JOURNEY FROM FREEDOM OF THE PRESS TO TRIAL MEDIA
The Media Trial phrase is popular since 20th century and gradually flowed into the 21st century where it describes the impact of television and newspaper coverage on a person’s reputation by creating a widespread perception of guilt or innocence before, or after, a verdict in a court of law. Here question arises whether the media is accountable; if yes, then to what extent, making a venture to strike a balance between two conflicting rights, the right to privacy of individual versus the right of free press to report . The Hon’ble former chief justice of India Justice N.V RAMANA one of his speeches said as; “Doing justice is not an easy responsibility.
It is becoming increasingly challenging with each passing day. At times, there are also concerted campaigns in media, particularly on social media against judges. Another aspect which affects the fair functioning and independence of judiciary is the rising numbers of media trial. .New media tools have enormous amplifying ability but appear to be incapable of distinguishing between the right and the wrong , the good and the bad and the real and fake. Media trial cannot be a guiding factor in deciding cases.
The judiciary has also thrown light upon the role of media in a democratic state. The importance of Article 19(1)(a) was given emphasis by Justice Bhagwati in the case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India7 “Democracy is based essentially on free debate and open discussion, for that is the only corrective of government action in a democratic setup. If democracy means the government of the people by the people, it is obvious that every citizen must be entitled to participate in the democratic process and in orderto enable him to intelligently exercise his rights of making a choice, free & general discussion of public matters is absolutely essential.
It is pertinent to mention that freedom of speech is guaranteed by several international conventions as well as the international covenant on civil and political Right, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights etc. In India freedom of speech and expression has not been expressly given to media, because it was believed that if each citizen has the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression it is implied that it is the citizens that form the press who have freedom of speech and expression either.
But sometimes misuses its power and became an obstructer of justice. The crucial and golden words ‘Freedom of the press’ plays a vital role in keeping democracy alive. However, the press is supposed to act as a vein that connects between the organ of the government and the public. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,1966, Article 19 states the right to freedom of speech, everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference’’ and the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art or through any other media of his choice. However, freedom comes up with restrictions on the press that are – ‘special duties and responsibilities’ and is subject to ‘the rights or reputation of others’.
RIA CHAKRAWARTI’S MEDIA TRIAL IN SUSHANT CASE
Passion for Publicity The two-judge bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Hon’ble Chief Justice Debankar Dutta and Hon’ble Justice G.S. Kulkarni, asses an order. As they spoke about media trials and contempt law. They have also answered the question of whether the contempt law can be used against media organizations that seem to be conducting trials by the media, After the death of Bollywood actor Sushant Singh Rajput, the actress Rea Chakraborty has found herself at the centre of a vicious hate campaign led by a media trial, the conservative television hosts have portrayed her as a defaming word and made an offensive remark. However, the real trial founds no evidence against her and Shushan’s death is still being investigated, but before the court’s judgment press has already declared the actress guilty of the crime. As per the well established procedural laws, it’s the job of the investigating officer and the courts, it’s not the job of the media to conduct the trial LEGALLY THIS IS SO WRONG,
LIMITATIONS ON THE FREEDOM OF MEDIA
There are many restrictions put on media by different legislative frame.
a. Constitution of India : The Supreme Court and High Court have the power to intervene and punish the person and publication of any matter, which causes prejudice to a pending proceeding to keep the stream of justice to clear and pure so that parties may proceed with safety both to themselves and to the character. That is why Article 19(1)(a) permits the imposition by the law of reasonable restrictions.
Article 19(1)(a) provides every citizen of a county a right to freedom of speech and expression. It includes the right to share one’s thought or views on any topic through any medium be it words (orally or written), painting, film etc. Moreover, there is a certain restriction in the same article in clause (2) which states that nothing in sub-clause (a)(1) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the state from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the state, friendly relation with foreign states, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offense.
b. The contempt of court act, 1971- restrictions on reporting issues which are “sub judice.”: It is in this area that the media comes in conflict with the judiciary. A free Press is indispensable for the smooth functioning of democracy. Courts are open to the public and, therefore, the administration of justice also should be open to public scrutiny which includes the freedom of the media to report court proceedings.
But such reporting can be made only subject to the restrictions imposed by the legal system. This will help the smooth functioning of the democracy and can thereby balance the power vested in each organ of the State and also the fourth estate in ensuring and upholding the rule of law. Where a judicial proceeding (including a trial) is imminent or pending before a court of justice, there is generally a prohibition against publication and discussion of the subject matter which is sub judice.
The expression “Sub judice” is a Latin expression that means “under a Judge” or “under judicial consideration”. That has been the consistent judicial interpretation under the since repealed Contempt of Courts Act, 1952. But, some ambiguity has been introduced in sub-clause (B) to clause (b) of the Explanation to Sec. 3 (3) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 with regard to the stage at which a matter can be considered to be “pending”.
C. Reporting of Court Proceeding: The Indian media has been playing a pivotal role in highlighting the functioning of the Indian judiciary and its decisions, more particularly in the last three decades. Indian judiciary seen as one of the most active and independent judicial system and is widely respected across the globe. It is true to reiterate that media forms the fourth limb in a democracy which has embraced rule of law for its governance.
The legislatures, the executive, and the judiciary work in tandem by way of allocation of power to each.
The relationship between media and judiciary needs to be carefully managed by both the institution while the media strives to provide access to information to the public it need to ensure that it does not trample upon the rights of various parties involved in a particular case or unduly influence the judiciary.
The problem raised by the trial by the media involves a tug of war between two conflicting principles “free press” and “free trial.” The press plays a vital part in the administration of justice. It is the watchdog to see that every trial is conducted fairly, openly and above board. The watchdog may sometime break loses and have to be punished for misbehavior. This is the reason for the law of contempt of court as applied to the press.
d. The doctrine of Presumption of innocence until proven guilty and guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.: “The is a presumption of innocence for every person until proven guilty’’ It is a recognized legal right, especially in a criminal trial. During the 2000s, the Supreme Court struck with the stance that the right to be presumed innocent is only a human right, in relation to the accused in the trial, which was reflected in a few judgments. In 2010, the first judgment, of Manu Sharma v. State (NCT) of Delhi, where the court was considering the impact of a media trial on the accused, came with a view that destruction of the presumption of innocence of the accused would go against the rule of law as well as Article 21 of the constitution.
CONCLUSION
As far as empowering the fourth estate to engage itself in such inquisitive ventures, the real need of the hour is to educate and enlighten the media with regard to the limitations on the freedom of speech and expression. Subject to the Constitutional and other statutory limitations, as far as possible, every agency should be able to operate in its own field without encroaching into the dominion earmarked for other agencies.
The appropriate course for the media may be to conduct a parallel investigation without any publicity and either aid the empowered investigating agency or even the trial Judge, leaving it to the curial process to decide, preferably after notice to all the stakeholders, as to whether a particular material should be admitted in evidence and relied on or not. In situations where the investigating agency is not above board, a such investigation by the media can serve as a check on the lack of probity of the empowered agencies in charge of investigation and prosecution, but at the same side media has no jurisdiction to pronounce the judgments.
Saba Fatima
B.A.LLB
Hamdard Institute of Legal Studies and Research (HILSR).
New Delhi.