The Indian media landscape is presently grappling with concerning issues related to the presumption of guilt, intrusion of personal privacy, and potential pervasion of misinformation. The Chief Justice of India (CJI) recently raised concerns over agenda-driven debates and kangaroo courts in the media, highlighting their potential adverse effects on democracy. This piece sets out to examine these contentious aspects, shedding light on their implications on the fairness of trials, the right to privacy, and the overall democratic health of the nation.
Understanding Kangaroo Courts
The term “Kangaroo Court” refers to a false or self-appointed judiciary system that essentially predetermines the judgment against an accused party. The purpose of such courts is to deliver predetermined judgments without much deliberation. This phrase, believed to have originated in Australia, was first noted during the California Gold Rush era of 1849. A notable historical instance of kangaroo courts was seen during the Stalin era in the Soviet Union, famously referred to as the Moscow Trails during the Soviet Great Purge.
Dissecting the Concept of Media Trials
Media trials can be understood as the impact of media coverage—be it television or print—on an individual’s reputation. It represents a growing trend where media conduct the trial of an accused and pass verdicts even before the judiciary has had a chance to do so. The power to execute such trials indirectly falls under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution, which safeguards every individual’s freedom of speech.
The Implications of Media Trials
Media trials, particularly rampant on social media platforms, can adversely affect the functioning of the judiciary. These often biased and agenda-propelled debates on pending legal matters impede the process of justifiable justice delivery. Modern media tools, while capable of vast reach, often fail to distinguish between truth and falsehood, consequently leading to wrongful portrayal of the accused.
Such trials hold detrimental impacts on democracy as well. Media entities, in their pursuit of sensational news, often breach their responsibilities towards the democratic system. Moreover, media trials can incite hatred, violence, and societal discord through the propagation of paid and fake news. They also infringe upon an individual’s right to privacy, as protected under Article 21 of Indian Constitution.
The Regulatory Landscape of the Indian Media Sector
There are four primary regulatory bodies that govern India’s media and entertainment sector, namely the Press Council of India (PCI), the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA), the Broadcasting Content Complaints Council (BCCC), and the News Broadcasters Federation (NBF). The PCI works towards preserving press freedom and improving news agency standards, while the NBSA, an industry body created by the News Broadcasters Association, addresses complaints against television programs.
A Forward-Looking Media Approach
The media, while exercising its watchdog role, should refrain from acting as a special agency for courts. Instead, it should focus on raising societal issues and becoming a voice for those without one. It is crucial that the media exercises restraint and avoids prematurely interfering with court matters. By adhering to its code of ethics and social responsibility, the media can maintain its credibility and contribute positively to a just and open society.