Legal experts say the Rajasthan ordinance to ban media from reporting details of public servants or judges in any case may not stand legal test.
New Delhi: On the face of it, the Rajasthan government has set itself a six-month deadline to sanction an investigation against any current or former bureaucrat and judge through an ordinance promulgated last month.
But the real devil in the details is an insertion that imposes a ban during the six-month deadline period on reporting, identifying or disclosing related details of those public servants or judges sought to be investigated in any case. And if violated, the punishment could entail up to two years’ imprisonment and fine.
Officials told ThePrint that any mention of politicians, officials or judges in any case is prohibited until the government gives sanction for prosecution. In other words, the six-month deadline is also a six-month bar on media to put out names or any relevant details that may reveal the identity of the person concerned.
The ordinance
On 7 September, Rajasthan governor Kalyan Singh gave his assent to this ordinance amending certain provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The amendments to both statutes pertain to disclosure of identity of public servants and powers of a magistrate to order an inquiry against a public servant, respectively.
This is only the second ordinance passed by Rajasthan this year.
Media regulation
The Rajasthan government ordinance says, “No one can publish or print or publicise in any manner the name, address, photograph, family details or any other particulars which may lead to disclosure of identity of a judge or magistrate or a public servant against whom any proceeding is pending,” until the 180-day period.
Violation of this provision would entail a maximum imprisonment of two years, along with fine.
In practical terms, the media would have been barred from naming politicians or officials in any scam for a period of six months until agencies were granted permission to investigate.
Pre-censoring media is a violation of free speech guaranteed by the Constitution.
“The apex court has settled this issue many times. This provision may not stand the legal test,” said a legal expert.
Prior sanction to prosecute public servants
In 2012, Subramanian Swamy had moved the apex court against then prime minister Manmohan Singh for not granting sanction in time to prosecute those officials accused in the 2G spectrum allocation scam. The top court had directed the government to decide on such sanctions within a period of three months from receiving a request.
If the government does not grant permission within three months, it will be treated that the sanction was granted.
The Bombay High Court in July asked the Maharashtra government to set itself a time frame to clear requests for sanctions.
For prosecuting public officials, generally, a prior sanction is required as per the Prevention of Corruption Act and the CrPC. It is riddled with exceptions but broadly, sanction is required for all serving officials. For those who are no longer in service, sanction is not required under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
However, the Rajasthan ordinance seems problematic as it paints everyone who has ever been a bureaucrat or a judge with the same brush, making no distinction between current and former officials.
In fact, even the Centre is considering a similar amendment to the Prevention of Corruption Act to shield both retired and serving bureaucrats. The Union Cabinet approved the amendments last year.
Similar amendments were proposed in 2013, by the UPA government but the bill was referred to a standing committee by the Rajya Sabha.
Bring all Journalists, Print electronic or mass media, within the ambit of prevention of corruption act and/or MCOCA like act to arrest and convict Supari taking Journos destroying reputation of citizens on invented grounds later negated by the due process of law.
One hopes from media journalist while reporting on any issue to speak for the issues that hinders the work of Journalism and transparency as well as the accountability of the Govt to its people. While the journalist reporting has expressed apprehension about the legality of the Ordnance he has refrained from saying that the ordnance is another draconian law to protect and encourage corruption not only that those would have the information of such corrupt acts will not come up to reveal the same. And also the article do not say anything about if the Rajasthan Govt. can make certain law which cover the Judiciary in the state. That the Govt. is trying its best to muzzle freedom of press and that way it is anti people anti constitution. Media men must not be just a reporting men like Postmen who deliver the letter but have no right to know the contents of the letter.