New Delhi: Anchors who try to create divisions in the society through their programmes should be taken off air, the Supreme Court remarked Friday while hearing a batch of petitions on hate speech.
“Media people must learn and realise they have no right to speak their minds whichever they want,” a bench of Justices K.M. Joseph and B.V. Nagarathna added.
The more than one-hour-long hearing saw the judges make critical observations against TV channels, who, they said, driven by financial considerations sensationalise every incident.
In the process, the bench added, the TV channels denigrate individuals and compromise on their dignity.
The judges criticised the manner in which newsrooms have reported the recent incident of a man peeing in an Air India flight. “Look at the names which the man was called on TV. He is an undertrial. You have to treat a person with human dignity,” Justice Joseph said.
During the hearing, additional solicitor general K.M. Nataraj informed the bench that the Centre is contemplating a separate amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to deal with hate speech. The views of the stakeholders have been sought regarding the amendments and it would be put through the legislative process, he told the bench.
On the court’s query as to whether the police have acted against hate speech in terms of its October, 2022 order that directed them take suo motu action in such cases, the counsel for Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand replied in the affirmative.
The counsel for Uttarakhand told the court that the state had registered 23 suo motu cases after the last order. But the lawyer added that the state was facing difficulties in pursuing the cases in those circumstances where a police officer is both the complainant and investigator.
A similar predicament was echoed by Uttar Pradesh’s Additional Advocate General Garima Prashad. She told the court that the state had registered 581 cases since October last year and about 160 of them were suo motu.
Looking at the numbers, Justice Joseph remarked that it was a quantum leap. The bench then went on to issue notices to all the states to make them parties so that a compliance report on its October, 2022 order can be sought from them.
As the bench expressed its concern over the menace of hate speech, it made specific observations against TV channels and their anchors. “Channels are competing against each other. They sensationalise and create divisions in society because of the visual element. The visual medium can influence you much more than a newspaper,” Justice Joseph noted, wondering if the Indian audience is mature enough to see the content telecast on news channels.
The top court asked the News Broadcasters and Digital Association (NBSA) about action taken against TV anchors who are “part of the problem.” “NBSA should not be biased. How many times have you taken off anchors?” it said.
The NBSA counsel claimed the association took measures as and when it got complaints. And, none of its orders have been assailed or challenged, meaning the complainants were satisfied with the association’s action.
However, the counsel acknowledged the body did not have any jurisdiction over two news channels — Republic TV and Sudarshan TV — and, therefore, was unable to issue any directions to them. Moreover, the body was not empowered with sufficient powers to discipline the channels, it said.
At this, the bench said NBSA must impose hefty fines on channels who violate the programme code and orders should be issued to take off anchors. “You hit them monetarily where it matters,” the bench added.
The judges went on to talk about the “unfairness” that is often noticed in TV debates. “If the anchor is not fair, the anchor would want to project some side, would mute other side, won’t question one side. It’s an indisputable insignia of bias,” the bench said.
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: Justice Nagarathna’s dissent in ministers’ speech case: ‘Hate speech denies right to dignity’