Parliament and Media Restructuring Journalist Cadre with Specialists and Continuing Education by Justice M.

. Jagannadha Rao Chairman, Law Commission of India

At the Commonwealth Conference organized a few years ago at New Delhi, by the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, the Commonwealth Press Associations, and the Commonwealth Journalists and Broadcasters Association, the former Vice-President of India Sri Krishan Kant described the coverage of proceedings by the Indian Press as casual and cursory, that even when debates are elaborately reported, the essence and the spirit of the debate is missing. In the same Conference, leading Indian participants, including the Lok Sabha Speaker, late Sri G.M.C. Balayogi, Sri Arun Jaitley, Sri S. Jaipal Reddy and Sri Kuldip Nayar, concurred with Sri Krishna Kants assessment that media coverage tended to give undue weightage to sensationalism by highlighting disorderly and unseemly conduct of some members and ignoring or downplaying the sober, serious and thoughtful contribution of the others. The Conference felt that if the representatives of the media did not perform their functions responsibly and effectively, or their roles are subverted, they could undermine the development or maintenance of parliamentary institutions and democratic culture in civil society.

None can have any dispute about the above assessment. We are currently passing through a phase of general deterioration of standards in all walks of life and the profession of journalists is no exception. Journalists have the great responsibility of moulding public opinion regarding the importance of Parliament and the proper dissemination of news concerning Parliamentary debates. The common man is, after all, guided by the headline news about Parliament rather than the columns of the experts inside. There is, therefore, a great need to project headlines which reflect the real substance of the debate. That is not all. It is also necessary to correctly cover the real content or core of the proceedings of Parliament or of the State Legislatures. Today, headlines and even content miss the central theme of the debates and merely concentrate on the walkouts or other unseemly conduct of a few members. Professional journalistic expertise and a much deeper knowledge of subjects which come for discussion before Parliament or the Legislatures alone can make the profession more sober. Journalists who are not competent enough to make a scholarly analysis of contemporary problems of public importance which come up for debate in Parliament, tend to indulge in sensationalism and will naturally exaggerate trivialities. In Parliament, there are several learned and experienced legislators both in the treasury benches and in the opposition. Some of them who have accomplished themselves in public life or in various professions contribute enormously to the complex issues that are debated. Of late, with the proceedings being telecast live on the television, the viewers are able to have a first hand impression of what precisely is being debated.

Some element of control on what can be telecast (particularly when certain situations get out of hand) is in the hands of the Speaker. However, with the coverage of the proceedings in Parliament and the Legislative Assemblies by the electronic media, it becomes incumbent for the media as a whole to eschew distortions about what transpires in the House and give an objective assessment of the goings on. Anne Summers, a veteran journalist who covered the proceedings of the Australian Parliament for many years, in an address to that body in August 1997 (The Media and Parliament: Image-Making and ImageBreaking) notes that the televising of parliamentary proceedings can be seen as something of an erosion of the medias previous monopoly on disseminating images of the Parliament at work to the wider world. Nevertheless, she points out that the key roles of the media are to provide information and to supplement this with comment, or assessment of the information. The journalists covering proceedings in the legislature for the print media can no longer rest complacent with attending only the question hour. They have an important role to play in objectively analyzing the entire proceedings and in moulding public opinion through their reports. One method by which legislatures can ensure that coverage of the proceedings in the House is done only by experienced and well informed journalists is to develop a system of accreditation. This is a practice that has been followed by many institutions including the Supreme Court of India. What is important however is that the criteria evolved for accreditation must be developed in consultation with the media, must be

published and a transparent method of implementing the same should be adopted. At this juncture, it might be useful to dwell on the powers and privileges of Parliament. The complete control that the legislature has over what goes on within the precincts of the House has remained unquestioned in most systems of Parliamentary democracy. The issues that have arisen in the context of breach of privilege of Parliament and State Legislatures in our country on account of the publication of proceedings by the print media have been debated time and again in public fora as well as in the courts. It may be recalled that in the renowned Searchlight case (Pandit M.S.M. Sharma v. Shri Sri Krishna Sinha) (1959 Supp 1 SCR 806), where the Speaker of the Bihar Legislative Assembly ordered the expunction of a portion of the speech of a member, the entire speech was reported in the English daily newspaper Searchlight of Patna edited by the petitioner. It was held that although the report was factually correct, it was in derogation of the Speakers order and therefore a breach of privilege. The Supreme Court further held in that case that the question whether an act is in breach of privilege of the House or not can be determined only by the House itself and not the court. Although the powers, privileges and immunities enjoyed by legislators under Article 194 (3) of the Constitution are the same as those of the House of Commons, the judgment of the Supreme Court in the historic Keshav Singh case (Special Reference No.1 of 1964 1965 1 SCR 413) explained that the right of a person, aggrieved by an order made by the Speaker of the House punishing such person for contempt of the House, to

move the High Court or the Supreme Court under Articles 226 and 32 respectively cannot be taken away and cannot be subjected to the powers and privileges under Article 194 (3). This is the balance that has been struck under the scheme of our Constitution so as to ensure that the power in any one organ of the state is not absolute or unchecked. The Press Council of India, established under the Press Council Act, 1978 plays an important role, as indicated in the Preamble to the said Act, for the purpose of preserving the freedom of the press and of maintaining and improving the standards of newspapers and news agencies in India. In addressing the concerns expressed about the quality of coverage of proceedings in Parliament, the Press Council can activate the formulation of a code of conduct for newspapers, news agencies and journalists which has to be adhered to, in accordance with high professional standards. The role played by the Press Council of India thus far is commendable and requires to be encouraged by everyone who believes in preserving the freedom of expression. As a keen observer of the changing patterns of coverage of news in general and proceedings of the legislatures in particular by the media, I have a few suggestions to make. One is restructuring of the cadre of journalists. The other is continuing education for journalists. As to restructuring, Managements have to give greater importance to academic excellence while recruiting journalists. They must enlist journalists who are post graduates in different subjects. For example,

specialized knowledge is necessary to digest issues relating to international trade and commerce, finance, economic affairs, foreign relations; law and courts; industry; medical and public health; environment and so on. Unless Managements select experts in various fields, they cannot improve upon the present state of affairs. The following restructuring of the journalist cadre from two feeder sources can bring about a great change. Post graduates who have specialized in various subjects must be recruited and given special training in journalism. Likewise, graduates in journalism must be trained to specialize in various subjects. A proper mixture of both these feeder channels of post graduate experts in subjects who are trained in journalism and journalist graduates who are given specialized training in various branches, is the need of the hour. Some of the leading newspapers in the country have had to constantly revise their recruitment policies to satisfy the growing demand for specialized knowledge of technical subjects. In house training and orientation of young journalists is another known device. What is unfortunate however is that this pattern is not uniformly followed by all newspapers. As regards the electronic media, with the sudden explosion of news channels, the need for ensuring minimum standards is even more acute. I am not aware if this need has sufficiently engaged the attention of the media themselves. As to continuing education for journalists, there must be a constant updating of knowledge. Programmes must be initiated for continuing education in various subjects for our journalists. Managements must establish extensive libraries and also see that the best newspapers from abroad are available and our journalists read them so that they may

improve their quality. I am aware that certain major newspapers have themselves initiated the setting up of institutes that offer degrees and diplomas in journalism conforming to the best possible standards as compared to reputed institutions elsewhere in the world. Nevertheless, there is thus a huge mismatch between demand and supply in this area. There is a growing need for setting up more such institutes, equipped with the best modern infrastructure, that can offer high quality training to anyone aspiring to be a competent and responsible journalist. Finally, I wish to conclude by reiterating some of the recommendations of the Commonwealth Conference held in New Delhi to which I adverted at the beginning of this piece, as to the role of media in covering Parliamentary debates. Media must gain comprehensive knowledge of and respect for the role and position of Parliament and Parliamentarians. It must provide fair and accurate coverage of Parliament and develop more imaginative and attractive ways to enhance Parliament coverage so that people are encouraged to take greater interest in the societys principal democratic forum. Media must expose the public more to the battle of ideas by providing coverage of Parliament and paying attention to views expressed by all the legislators. It must constantly watch and cover the activities of parliamentary committees and analyse their reports and other documents in greater detail. It must respect the right of public figures and their families to a degree of personal privacy consistent with a responsible definition of people right to know. Media must ensure that parliamentary and political news coverage and analysis are clear, factual, objective and

differentiated from opinion. Media must put greater emphasis on inquiring more deeply and objectively into public policy issues, focus less on trivialities and not rely solely on news-releases. It must assign its most competent journalists to cover Parliament so that the broad range of complex issues arising in Parliament are adequately covered. It must provide constructive criticism and informed and fearless coverage of political issues so that an increasingly aware electorate has the information which it needs for the purpose of participating in the democratic process. It must refrain from fabricating controversies and over-playing internal differences of opinion within political parties, which may often be no more than honest disagreements over policy. In formulating standards, it must consider codes already in place elsewhere. Standards, no doubt, must be set by the Press for each country but they must be comparable with the best abroad.

MEDIA AND LAW

Freedom of the media is indeed an integral part of the freedom of expression and essential requisite of a democratic set up. The Indian Constitution has granted this freedom by way of Fundamental Right. The media, which is obligated to respect the rights of individual, is also obligated to work within the framework of legal principles and statutes. These principles/statutes have been framed by way of minimum standards and do not intend to detract from higher standards of protection to the freedom of expression. The media is the Fourth limb of a democratic system, the legislature, executive and judiciary being the other three. While legislature prepares the law for the society and the executive takes steps for implementing them, the third stepping-stone is the judiciary, which has to ensure legality of all actions and decisions. The Fourth Estate i.e. the press has to operate within the framework of these statutes and constitutional provision to act in public and national interest. This is indicative of the fact that nobody is above law. When the Constitution of India guaranteed freedom of expression and speech to its citizens, it ensured that the freedom was not absolute and any expression, by way of words, speech or visual medium, did not violate any statutory provisions enacted by legislature and executed by the executive. If the media, electronic or print, exceeded its jurisdiction, the courts came forward to ensure that violation of the Fundamental rights by the media does not go unchecked. The Press Council of India, which I represent here today as its Chairman, was born out of the anxiety of our constitutional fathers to ensure that democracy can flourish only where its citizens enjoy full freedom of speech and expression subject only to reasonable restrictions. The press is rightly covered within the ambit of Article 19 (1) (a) even without an express mention. However, once the freedom struggle was over it was realised that a new kind of press was emerging in the post independence era whose aims and objects were undergoing fast change. The First Press Commission set up in 1954 examined the issue in depth and proposed the establishment of a Press Council as a peer body by regulate the conduct of their own brethren without any outside or governmental interference. Similar bodies were functional in several other democracies, but these were primarily voluntary organisations. In India, it was deemed more appropriate to give the Council the statutory backing affording due weightage of its adjudications and pronouncements. The Press Council of India has since functioned like a Court of Honour, guiding the print media along the path of ethical conduct and at the same time protecting it from any onslaught on its freedom.

10

The Press Council also functions as an advisory body to the government on matters affecting press freedom and has rendered valuable advise on several legislations. These cover the areas of libel, invasion of privacy, right to information, parliamentary privileges, Prevention of Terrorist Activities, Official Secrets, and many more. Lately, the Press Council had advised the Parliament on Truth being accepted as a defence in contempt of court proceedings, and the enactment incorporating these provisions in Contempt of Court Act has recently been passed. Similarly, the Council has drawn up a set of norms on media reporting on court proceedings. It will be appropriate to refer to them in detail here. "Caution in criticizing judicial act i) Excepting where the court sits in-camera or directs otherwise, it is open to a newspaper to report pending judicial proceedings, in a fair, accurate and reasonable manner. But it shall not publish anything : which, in its direct and immediate effect, creates a substantial risk of obstructing, impeding or prejudicing seriously the due administration of justice; or is in the nature of a running commentary or debate, or records the papers own findings conjectures, reflection or comments on issues, sub judice and which may amount to abrogation to the newspaper the functions of the court; or ii) regarding the personal character of the accused standing trial on a charge of committing a crime. Newspaper shall not as a matter of caution, publish or comment on evidence collected as a result of investigative journalism, when, after the accused is arrested and charged, the court becomes seized of the case: Nor should they reveal, comment upon or evaluate a confession allegedly made by the accused. iii) While newspapers may, in the public interest, make reasonable criticism of a judicial act or the judgement of a court for public good; they shall not cast scurrilous aspersions on, or impute improper motives, or personal bias to the judge. Nor shall they scandalize the court or the judiciary as a whole, or make personal allegations of lack of ability or integrity against a judge.

11

iv)

Newspaper shall, as a matter of caution, avoid unfair and unwarranted criticism which, by innuendo, attributes to a judge extraneous consideration for performing an act in due course of his/her judicial functions, even if such criticism does not strictly amount to criminal Contempt of Court.

b)

Reporting news pertaining to court proceedings Before publishing a news item about court proceedings, it will be appropriate for the correspondent and editor to ascertain its genuineness and, correctness and authenticity from the records so that the concerned person can be held guilty and accountable for furnishing incorrect facts or wrong information about the court proceedings.

A lot remains to be done to ensure that two of the strongest pillars of our democracy i.e. the judiciary and the media work in tandem to promote the democratic secular principles enshrined in our constitution. Inter national Efforts In 1994, a group of 39 distinguished legal experts and media representatives, convened by the International Commission of Jurists, its Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, and the Spanish Committee of UNICEF, met for three days in Madrid, Spain. The objectives of the meeting were to examine the relationship between the media and judicial independence, to formulate principles to help the media and the judiciary develop a relationship that serves both freedom of the expression and the judicial independence. The participants came from Brazil, Sri Lanka, United Kingdom, Sweden, Jordan, Australia, Ghana, France, India, Spain, Germany, Austria, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Switzerland, Senegal, Palestine, Bulgaria, Croatia, and Slovakia. The following are the principles drawn up at the meet. The Madrid Principles on the Relationship between the Media and Judicial Independence. Freedom of the media, which is an integral part of freedom of expression, is essential in a democratic society. It is the responsibility of judges to recognise and give effect to freedom of the media by applying a basic presumption in their favour and by permitting only such restrictions on freedom of the media as are authorised by the

12

International Covenant in Civil and Political Rights ("International Covenant") and are specified in precise laws.

The media have an obligation to respect the rights of individuals, protected by the International Covenant, and the independence of the judiciary. These principles are drafted as minimum standards and may not be used to detract from existing higher standards of protection of the freedom of expression. The Basic Principle 1. Freedom of expression (including freedom of the media) constitutes one of the essential foundations of every society which claims to be democratic. It is the function and right of the media to gather and convey information to the public and to comment on the administration of justice, including cases before, during and after trial, without violating the presumption of innocence. 2. This principle can only be departed from in the circumstances envisaged in the International Covenant in Civil and Political Rights, as interpreted by the 1984 Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, (UN Document E/CN.4/1984/4). 3. The right to comment on the administration of justice shall not be subject to any special restrictions. Scope of the Basic Principle 4. The basic principle does not exclude the preservation by law of secrecy during the investigation of crime even where investigation forms part of the judicial process. Secrecy in such circumstances must be regarded as being mainly for the benefit of persons who are suspected or accused and to preserve the presumption of innocence. It shall not restrict the right of any such person to communicate to the Press information about the investigation of the circumstances being investigated. 5. The basic principle does not exclude the holding in camera of proceedings intended to achieve conciliation or settlement of private cause.

13

6. The basic principle does not require a right to broadcast live or recorded court proceedings. applicable. Where this is permitted, the basic principle shall remain

Restrictions 7. Any restriction of the basic principle must be strictly prescribed by law. Where any such law confers a discretion or power, that discretion or power must be exercised only by a judge. 8. Where a judge has a power to restrict the basic principle and is contemplating the exercise of that power, the media (as well as any other person affected) shall have the right to be heard for the purpose of objecting to the exercise of that power and, if exercised, a right of appeal. 9. Laws may authorise restrictions of the basic principle to that extent necessary in a democratic society for the protection of the minors and of members of other groups in need of special protection. 10. Laws may restrict the basic principle in relation to criminal proceedings in the interest of the administration of justice to the extent necessary in a democratic society. (a) for the prevention of serious prejudice to a defendant (b) for the prevention of serious harm to or improper pressure witness, a member of a jury, or a victim. 11. Where a restriction of the basic principle is sought on the ground of national security, this should not jeopardise the right of the parties, including the rights of the defence. The defence and the media shall have the right, to the greatest extent possible, to know the grounds on which the restriction is sought (subject, if necessary, to a duty of confidentiality if the restriction is imposed) and shall have the right to contest this restriction. being placed upon a

14

12.

In civil proceedings, restrictions of the basic principle may be imposed if authorised by law to the extent necessary in a democratic society to prevent serious harm to the legitimate interest of a private party.

13. No restriction shall be imposed in any arbitrary or discriminatory manner. 14. No restriction shall be imposed except strictly to the minimum extent and for the minimum time necessary to achieve its purpose, and no restriction shall be imposed if a more limited restriction would be likely to achieve that purpose. The burden of proof shall rest on the party requesting the restriction.

Annex I Strategies of Implementation 1. Judges should receive guidance in dealing with the Press. Judges should be encouraged to assist the press by providing summaries of long or complex judgements of matters of public interest and by other appropriate measures. 2. Judges shall not be forbidden to answer questions from the Press relating to the administration of justice, though reasonable guidelines as to dealing with such questions may be formulated by the judiciary, which may regulate discussion of identifiable proceedings. 3. The balance between independence of the judiciary, freedom of the press and respect of the rights of the individual - particularly of minors and other persons in need of special protection - is difficult to achieve. Consequently, it is indispensable that one or more of the following measures are placed at the disposal of affected persons or groups: legal recourse, Press Council, Ombudsman for the press, with the understanding that such circumstances can be avoided to a large extent by establishing a Code of Ethics for the media which should be elaborated by the profession itself." Mr. F. S. Nariman, the noted jurist, had once observed, A responsible Press is the handmaiden of effective judicial administration. The Press does not simply publish information about cases and trials but, subjects the entire Justice hierarchy (police, prosecutors, lawyers, Judges, Courts), as well as the judicial processes, to public scrutiny. Free and robust reporting, criticism and debate contribute to public understanding of the rule of law, and to a better comprehension of the entire Justice system. It also helps improve the

15

quality of that system by subjecting it to the cleansing effect of exposure and public accountability. The need is that the courts be criticized but there is just as great a need that courts be allowed to do their duty fearlessly. I would like to conclude by quoting Mahatama Gandhi : one of the objects of a newspaper is to understand the popular feeling and give expression to it, another is to arouse among the people certain desirable sentiments, and the third is the fearlessness to expose popular defects. I hope this seminar would discuss, in the above context, the recent activities of the media like the sting operations, invasion of the privacy of individual, trial by the media parallel to court trials and sensationalism and trivialization of news and information. The question is not of the deficiency of law on media, but the observance and effective implementation of the existing laws. With the impact of globalisation, the scenario in media reporting has undergone and is still undergoing changes faster than anticipated. There is need for deep introspection by media person charged with avowed orientation for Bahujan Hitayaa Bahujana Sukhayaa cha. Being watchdog of the society the media persons cannot afford to be oblivious even for a moment of its responsibilities and reasonable expectation of the society from them. Permit me to quote translated version from a poem of Viswakavi Rabindra Nath Thakur: Remain steadfast; Remain awake like a night candle, In this hour of darkness, if you fall asleep; There who need you help will go back disappointed