Media coverage of security ops under serious consideration: Arun Jaitley

January 19, 2015

Arun Jaitley media

New Delhi, Jan 19: Terming it as the “desire of the media to be an actor” while reporting from scenes of security operations, Union I&B Minister Arun Jaitley Sunday said the country’s security and defence establishments were of the view that this cannot be allowed and that the matter was under “serious and very advanced consideration” of the government.

“How do you report instances where insurgent action is on… where a security operation is in full swing? Should the media go into the midst of the scene and therefore report from the spot as to what is happening. Or, should the media have some constraints?” Jaitley asked. He was delivering the first Justice J S Verma memorial lecture on ‘Freedom & Responsibility of Media’ here.

“We’ve have intelligence information to say that because Indian television had decided to bring the 26/11 reporting almost in real-time as to what action was being taken, the terrorists inside the hotels were being informed on their satellite phones by their handlers as to what the Indian security forces were doing,” Jaitley said.

“Our security agencies and the Ministry of Defence are clearly of the view that this cannot be allowed. And, therefore, during the limited duration when the security operation is on, a very strict discipline on the kind of reporting which is to take place from the place of the incident will have to be maintained. This issue is under serious and very advanced consideration of the government,” he added.

On instances of trial by the media, Jaitley said, “I am constrained to observe that certain trial courts are under tremendous pressure, particularly in high-profile cases where the media has conducted a parallel trial and almost declared somebody guilty or innocent.”

The minister also underlined that the “privacy of individuals” even in “high-profile cases” needed to be respected and that “media will have to seriously introspect as to what extent it should go to” when dealing with “areas which have no bearing on larger public interest” but “can only add some spice to the content of the report”.

On the “sub judice rule”, Jaitley said in larger matters of public interest, one cannot have a complete gag on the media “merely because an issue is pending in a court”. He, however, added that if there are “issues relating to individual culpability — where innocence or guilt has to be judged — the parallel trial concept prejudices the entire environment around which a person is to get justice”.

The minister also said any move where the government gets into “disciplining media organisations” may have its own pitfalls.

“It may have its own pitfalls if the government gets into the business of disciplining media organisations. I would be more comfortable if the viewers or the readers decide that,” Jaitley said.

On the issue of cross-holdings in the media, Jaitley said most jurisdictions the world over ban cross-holding rights. “If you own newspapers, you cannot own channels. If you own channel, then you can’t own the medium through which a channel is telecast, that is, the cable or DTH. We have no such restrictions,” he said.

Stating that the media today has a responsibility “to be credible, to be fair, to be an educator on sensitive issues and to maintain the highest standards of financial integrity”, Jaitley added that the “media will have to be extra careful where its own interests are involved and therefore wherever there is a possibility of conflict of interest, adequate disclosure to that effect has to be made”.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 18,2020

New Delhi, Jul 18: With 34,884 people testing positive for coronavirus in the last 24 hours, India's Covid-19 caseload surged to 10,38,716 while 6,53,750 patients have recovered from the disease so far, according to data by the Union Health Ministry.

The death toll due to Covid-19 rose to 26,273 with 671 fatalities reported in a day, the data updated at 8 am on Saturday showed.

At present, there are 3,58,692 active cases in the country, while 6,53,750 people have recovered so far and one has migrated.

"Around 62.94 per cent of patients have recovered so far," an official said.

The total number of confirmed cases includes foreigners.

This is the third consecutive day when the number of Covid-19 cases increased by more than 30,000.

According to the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), a cumulative total of 1,34,33,742 samples have been tested for COVID-19 up to July 17 with 3,61,024 samples being tested on Friday.

Of the 671 deaths reported in the last 24 hours, 258 are from Maharashtra, 115 from Karnataka, 79 from Tamil Nadu, 42 from Andhra Pradesh, 38 from Uttar Pradesh, 26 each from West Bengal and Delhi, 17 from Gujarat, nine each from Jammu and Kashmir and Punjab, and eight each from Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan.

Telangana has reported seven fatalities followed by Haryana with five deaths, Jharkhand, Bihar and Odisha reported four each, Assam and Puducherry have registered three each, Chhattisgarh and Goa reported two each while Kerala and Uttarakhand have registered a fatality each.

Of the total 26,273 deaths reported so far, Maharashtra accounted for the highest 11,452 fatalities followed by Delhi with 3,571 deaths, Tamil Nadu 2,315, Gujarat 2,106, Karnataka 1,147, Uttar Pradesh 1,084, West Bengal 1,049, Madhya Pradesh 697 and Rajasthan 546.

So far 534 people have died of COVID-19 in Andhra Pradesh, 403 in Telangana, 327 in Haryana, 239 in Punjab, 231 in Jammu and Kashmir, 201 in Bihar, 83 in Odisha, 51 in Uttarakhand and Assam each, 46 in Jharkhand and 38 in Kerala.

Puducherry has registered 25 deaths, Chhattisgarh 23, Goa 21, Himachal Pradesh and Chandigarh 11 each, Arunachal Pradesh and Tripura three each, Meghalaya and Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu two each while Ladakh has reported one fatality.

The Health Ministry stressed that more than 70 per cent of the deaths occurred due to comorbidities.

Maharashtra has reported the highest number of cases at 2,92,589 followed by Tamil Nadu at 1,60,907, Delhi at 1,20,107, Karnataka at 55,115, Gujarat at 46,430, Uttar Pradesh at 45,163 and Telangana at 42,496.

The number of Covid-19 cases has gone up to 40,646 in Andhra Pradesh, 38,011 in West Bengal, 27,789 in Rajasthan, 24,797 in Haryana, 23,589 in Bihar and 21,081 in Madhya Pradesh.

Assam has instances of 20,646 infections, Odisha 16,110 and Jammu and Kashmir 12,757 cases. Kerala has reported 11,066 novel coronavirus infections so far, while Punjab has 9,442 cases.

A total of 4,964 have been infected by the virus in Chhattisgarh, 4,921 in Jharkhand, 4,102 in Uttarakhand, 3,304 in Goa, 2,366 in Tripura, 1,832 in Puducherry, 1,800 in Manipur, 1,417 in Himachal Pradesh and 1,151 in Ladakh.

Nagaland has recorded 956 Covid-19 cases, Chandigarh 660, Arunachal Pradesh 609 and Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu together have reported 585 cases.

Meghalaya has reported 403 cases, Mizoram 282, Sikkim has registered 266 infections so far, while Andaman and Nicobar Islands has recorded 194 cases.

"Our figures are being reconciled with the ICMR," the ministry said, adding that 163 cases are being reassigned to states.

State-wise distribution is subject to further verification and reconciliation, it added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 6,2020

New Delhi, Mar 6: Justice S Muralidhar Thursday cleared the air over the controversy on his transfer from the Delhi High Court to Punjab and Haryana High Court, saying he had replied to Chief Justice of India S A Bobde's communication that he was fine with the proposal and had no objection to it.

The controversy erupted after the Centre issued Justice Muralidhar's transfer notification close to mid night of February 26 -- the day a bench headed by him had pulled up Delhi Police for failing to register FIRs against three BJP leaders for their alleged hate speeches which purportedly led to the recent violence in northeast Delhi.

Justice Muralidhar (58), who received a grand farewell on Thursday from a huge gathering including judges and lawyers amid big rounds of applause, said he wanted to clear the confusion on his transfer and narrated the sequence of events from the time he received CJI's communication till February 26.

The Supreme Court collegium, headed by the CJI, had in a meeting on February 12 recommended the transfer of Justice Muralidhar to Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Justice Muralidhar was number three in the Delhi High Court, his parent high court as a judge.

Explaining the transfer process, he said the 5-member collegium sends to the Centre a recommendation that a judge of a high court should be transferred to another high court. The judge concerned is not at this stage under orders of transfers. That happens only when the collegium's recommendation fructifies into a notification.

“In my case, the collegium's decision was communicated to me by the CJI on February 17 by a letter which sought my response. I acknowledged receipt of the letter, I was then asked to clarify what I meant. As I saw it, if I was to be transferred from the Delhi High Court any way, I was fine with moving to the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

“I therefore clarified to the CJI that I did not object to the proposal. An explanation for my transfer reached the press...on February 20 quoting 'sources in the Supreme Court collegium', confirming what has been indicated to me a couple of days earlier,” he said.

The CJI's letter dated February 14 was delivered to Justice Muralidhar on February 17, the day when the family's pet labrador Sakhi breathed her last.

He said February 26 was perhaps the longest working day of his life as a judge of the Delhi High Court, where he has spent 14 years on the bench.

He said it began at 12:30 am with a sitting at his residence with Justice A J Bhambhani, under the orders of Justice G S Sistani, to deal with a PIL filed by Rahul Roy seeking safe passage of ambulances carrying the injured riot victims.

“When I received a call at my residence from the lawyer for the petitioner, I first called Justice Sistani to ask what should be done, knowing that the Chief Justice (CJ) was on leave. Justice Sistani explained that he too was officially on leave the whole of February 26 and that I should take up the matter.

“This fact is stated in the order passed by the bench after the hearing. Later that day, upon urgent mentioning, as the de facto CJ's bench, Justice Talwant Singh and I took up another fresh PIL on the CJ's board seeking registration of FIRs for hate speeches. After the orders passed on that day, the above two PILs remained on the CJ's Board,” he said.

Justice Muralidhar ended the speech saying the notification which was issued close to midnight of February 26 did two things.

“First, it transferred me to Punjab and Haryana High Court. Second, it appointed me to a position from where I can never be transferred, or removed and in which I shall always be proud to remain. A 'former judge' of arguably the best high court in the country. The High Court of Delhi,” he said, following a standing ovation by all the judges and the gathering, including his family members, former judges, lawyers, court staff and media persons.

Earlier in the day, a farewell programme was also organised by the Delhi High Court Bar Association.

While addressing the gathering at the bar's function, Justice Muralidhar concluded his address saying “When justice has to triumph, it will triumph ... Be with the truth - Justice will be done.”

Justice Muralidhar's mother, wife Usha Ramanathan, former Delhi High Court chief justice A P Shah, senior advocate Shanti Bhushan and former Delhi University VC Upendra Baxi were also present at the later function that was organised by the court.

Bidding adieu to Justice Muralidhar, Delhi HC CJ D N Patel said it was an occasion which has come with a saddening effect and his absence will be felt institutionally as well as personally.

Delhi government standing counsel (criminal) Rahul Mehra termed Justice Muralidhar as a “highly intellectual, courageous, upright and incorruptible judge” and sang bengali song 'ekla chalo re' to describe him.

Mehra said he joins Delhi High Court Bar Association in “strongly condemning” Justice Muralidhar's transfer.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
July 11,2020

New Delhi, Jul 11: A notice which claims that a COVID-19 Monitoring Committee has been formed is fake, and no such committee has been set up by the Union Home Ministry, as per Spokesperson, Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA).

The "Fake" MHA order stated, "Pursuant to the official orders received dated: Monday, May 18, 2020, of the Honourable Minister of Home Affairs, passed in the approval of Special Status Advisory Committee for COVID-19, a COVID-19 Monitoring Committee has been constituted in the MHA vide order dated: Friday, June 12, 2020."

MHA Spokesperson also cautioned people to beware of fake news and rumours.

India's COVID-19 case count crossed the eight lakh-mark on Saturday with yet another highest single-day spike of 27,114 new cases in the last 24 hours.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.