Source: http://www.mediawise.org.uk/india-3/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 06:39:20+00:00

Document:
The Press Council of India.
In some of the third world countries, and particularly India, the Press Council is a Statutory body. A Bill was introduced in the Parliament in 1956. But it lapsed with the dissolution of the House in 1957. No further action for setting the Council was taken for nearly a decade thereafter. It was only after National Integration Council strongly recommended the establishment of Council that the Bill was resurrected and the Press Council Act passed by the Parliament in 1965. The Press Council of India constituted under the Act came into being on 4th July, 1966.
The Press Council under the Act of 1965 was abruptly abolished by the Press Council Repeal Act, 1976 during the days of the 1975 National Emergency. In 1977 Janata Party came to power and they enacted the Press Council Act, 1978. The object of 1978 Act stated that the establishment of the Press Council was to preserve the Freedom of the Press and maintenance and improvement of the standard of newspapers and news agencies in India.
* A shield to Freedom of the Press4.
Section 26 of the Act empowers the Council to frame regulations for conducting inquiries. The Council has framed the Press Council (Procedure for Inquiry) Regulations, 1979.
Any person making a complaint to the Council in respect of a publication or non-publication of any matter under Section 14(l) of the Act, should furnish in the complaint the following details.
a) Name and address of the newspaper or news agency, editor or other working journalist against whom or which the complaint is preferred5.
b) A Statement showing in what manner the publication and non-publication of the matter complained of is objectionable6.
c) A copy of the letter written by the complainant to the newspaper or news agency, or editor or other working journalist bringing the matter to his notice, together with a copy of reply if any received. However, in appropriate cases the Chairman has discretion to waive the condition7.
d) In cases where the complaint is that the editor or working journalist has committed a professional misconduct other than by way of publication or non-publication, the complainant shall set out clearly in detail the facts, which according to him justify the complaint8.
The complaint relating to publication or non publication of any matter has to be preferred within two months if the complaint is against editor, news agency and weekly, and within four months in all other cases.
The complainant while presenting the complaint shall at the foot there of make and subscribe to a declaration to the effect9.
i) that to the best of his knowledge and belief he has placed all the relevant facts before the Council and that no proceedings are pending in any court of law in respect of any matter alleged in the complaint.
ii) that he shall inform the Council forthwith if during the pendency of the inquiry before the Council any matter alleged in the complaint becomes the subject matter of any proceeding in any court of law.
As soon as a complaint is received, and in any case not later than 15 days from the date of receipt of a complaint, a copy thereof shall be sent to the newspaper, news agency, or other working journalist against whom the complaint is made, with a notice requiring him to show cause why action should not be taken under the Act. In appropriate case the Chairman may waive the condition regarding the issue of notice. If the chairman is of opinion that there is no sufficient ground for holding an inquiry, no notice need be issued. However, at the next meeting of the Council the Chairman shall apprise the Council of the reasons for his decision for not issuing the notice.
The person, against whom the complaint is preferred, has to submit a written statement within fourteen days from the service of the notice or such extended time as may be granted by the Chairman. On its receipt, a copy thereof shall be forwarded to the complaint for information. If further details are required, the Chairman may call for them from the complainant or the respondent.
The inquiry committee constituted by the Council may consider the complaint and written statement and call for additional particulars or documents if required. Section 8. (1) of the Act empowers the Council to constitute from amongst its members any committee for the purpose. of performing its functions. Inquiries in the case of complaints made by or against the Press are conducted by the committee so constituted.
iii) Whether any issue relating to the subject matter of the complaint is sub judice.
When criticism levelled against any individual personally in a newspaper, right to reply is available to the affected person and no third person has locus standi. The principle was highlighted by the Council in Dr. Sathyanarayanan Dave v. Indian Express10. -the facts of the case discloses that Indian Express in its issue dated May 6, 1988 published an editorial under the caption ‘Remove the Fabrications’. lauding a judgement of the Supreme Court in acquitting a person in a prosecution launched by the CBI. The impugned editorial not only criticised the prime investigating agency of the country for fabricating evidence but also held Mohan Katre, Director of CBI, for converting it into hatchets of the rules. In a letter to the Editor, Dr. Satyanarayana Dave, a journalist, protested against the personal remarks against Mohan Katre. This letter was not, published and Dr. Satyanarayana Dave field a complaint before the Council. The senior editor of Indian Express submitted before the Council that publication of letters to the editor was purely a matter of discretion. He further maintained that the impugned editorial did not contain anything which affected the complainant personally, and that no material to rebut the criticism against Katre was produced. It was maintained that Katre alone was competent to protest. The Council concluded that the complainant was not personally affected by the editorial and had no locus standi. The rule of locus standi ensures that the process of the Council shall not normally be invoked at the instance of a person who has no special stake or interest in the matter11. Similarly when the allegations pertain to the commission of some corrupt practice, any other person may not be in a position to contradict the allegation.
There are exceptions to the rule. In C. S. Kalra v. Arun Shouriel2 the complaint related to the publication of the report in Indian Express containing filthy words used by the Deputy-Prime Minister. The editor contended that the complainant had no locus standi. The complainant submitted that use of such filthy words was detrimental to public taste and asserted locus standi as it was a matter or public interest. Here the complainant was not challenging the veracity of the report, but only that such publication was detrimental to public interest. The Council proceeded with the inquiry into the complaint and held that the editor could have made the report after excluding the offensive words. This shows that any interested person can lodge a complaint if filthy, vulgar, or abusive words are used in any published matter. If defamatory matter about a religious leader is published, a devotee or disciple has locus standi to move complaint.
In a major decision on jurisdiction, the Council ruled in Dr. A. K. Sukhla v. Comparative Physiology and Ecology13 that the Council had no jurisdiction to inquire into an instance of breach of contract. The complaint pertained to alleged false assurances given by the editor about publication of complainant research papers. According to him he had fulfilled all conditions laid by the journal for publication. The Council held that the substance of the complaint was breach of contract between them and as such there was no reasonable nexus between the matter and the functions of the Council. Therefore the Council had no jurisdiction.
The Press Council will not take action on a complaint if it is pending in any court of law. This is treated as sub-judice. This was made clear in Dr. S. V. Charupure v. Middayl4, here the complainant’s suit is pending before Bombay High Court. The Council therefore decided to drop further inquiry.
Section 4(3) of the Press Council Act prohibits the Council to hold an inquiry in any matter in respect of which any proceeding is pending in any court of law.
Every profession requires its own ethical standard. It is the code of honour of professional conduct which distinguish a profession from a mere occupation16. The speciality of journalistic profession is its independence. In a profession it is necessary that they should be judged by his peer and the function is to be so exercised as to achieve the objective of exemplary professional conduct.
The Press Council in Norms of Journalistic Conduct states the Principles and Ethics that the fundamental objective of journalism is to serve the people with news, views, comments and information on matters of public interest in a fair, accurate, unbiased, sober and decent manner. Towards this end, the Press is expected to conduct itself in keeping with certain norms of professionalism universally recognised. The norms enunciated below, when applied with due discernment and adaptation to the varying circumstance of each case, will help the journalist to self-regulate his or her conduct. The norms are Accuracy and Fairness, Pre-publication Verification, Caution against defamatory writing, Parameter for the right of the Press to comment on the acts and conduct of public officials, right to privacy, recording interviews and phone conservation, Conjecture, comment and fact, Newspapers to eschew suggestive guilty, corrections, right of reply, letters to editor, obscenity and vulgarity to be eschewed, violence not to be glorified, glorification/encouragement of social evils to be eschewed, covering communal disputes/ clashes, heading not to be sensational/ provocative and must justify the matter printed under them, caste, religion or community references, reporting on natural calamities, paramount national interest, newspapers may expose misuse of diplomatic immunity, investigative Journalism and its norms and parameters, confidence to be respected, caution in criticising judicial acts, newspapers to avoid crass commercialism, plagiarism, unauthorised lifting of news, non-return of unsolicited material and advertisements. Also Council issued some guidelines on specific issues.
It is open to any person to lodge a complaint with the Press Council against a newspaper for breach of ethical canons of journalistic propriety and public taste. The Press can approach the Council alleging interference with its free functioning. In such a case only a newspaper, a journalist or any institution or individual concerned with a journal can appear as a complainant. They may complain against Central Government, State Government or any organization like political parties. The article attempts to analyse the nature and effect of such complaints made by the newspapers before the Press Council.
ii) that the Press should not in its own interest, indulge in scurrilous or other objectionable writings – writings such as have been considered below the level of recognised standards of journalistic ethics by a fair-minded jury like the Council constituted of the Press itself, for it would lead to the very loss of the much prized freedom of the Press18.The Council performs the functions such as helping newspapers and news agencies to maintain independence and keeping under review any development likely to restrict the supply and dissemination of news of public interest and importance19. The Council exercises against the authority and pronouncing verdict thereon. The Council has been empowered to make in any of its decisions or reports such observation, as it may think fit, about the conduct of any authority including a government20.
Press freedom depends on the absence of pressure from various power centres like ministers, legislators, administrators, party bosses etc. The Press and newsmen have been the victims of onslaught from various sources. The tendency of the administration is to make the Press tow the official line. They try to intimidate the Press and journalists who are goaded to act under dictation.
(d) Pressure and assault by government.
(a) Police atrocities: This may arise when police are involved in a matter and want to shield themselves from being exposed through news column. This may happen when the police either engage in anti-social activities or take side with anti-social elements.
The Council has opined that the high handed conduct of the police directly affects the freedom of Press. In Chief Editor, Sainik v. Police Official of Fatehabad, Agra2l the Chief Editor of Sainik alleged that policemen were directed to beat the correspondent and cameraman while compiling news concerning elections to School of Agricultural Productivity. He further alleged that the cameras were snatched away and that all the lyres of their jeep were deflated. The motive alleged was that they had published a news item concerning the affairs of police post at Daoki in Agra. The respondent contended that a prohibitory order near the election booth was in force and the police had to push away people who were within the area. It was also argued that the tyres of the jeep were deflated in enforcement of their duties. The Inquiry Committee refused to accept the defence and further observed that the complaint contained truth and therefore the Council deplored the conduct of police to the extent that it obstructed exercise of the freedom of Press by the journalist.
(b) Pressure and assault by political parties: Political parties control the levers of power and guide the destinies of modern democracies. Press also has a crucial role to play in the functioning of democratic government. Thus the relationship between political parties on the one hand and Press on the other becomes a sensitive subject. From the sociological point of view both Press and political parties are group of persons. Hence interaction between these groups has their impact on society. One aspect of such interaction is, how far political parties try to curtail Press Freedom both covertly and overtly.
What role could the Press Council play in such a sensitive field is indeed a baffling question. In Malayala Manorama v. Youth Wing of Communist Party of India & Govt. of Kerala22, the complainant alleged that there were attacks on their office premises at Kottayam, Calicut and Cochin by the youth wing of the CPI. The State Government submitted that criminal cases had been registered against certain leaders and workers in that connection. The Council deferred the matter as sub-juidice. The Council observed that raids in newspaper offices by unruly mobs interfered with the freedom of Press and hence was regrettable. In such situations suitable precautionary and protective measures ought to be taken by the administration.
(c) Attacks by anti-social elements: Complaints of attacks and threats by antisocial groups reach the council when the police refuses to take effective action promptly. In such cases the government invariably assures the Council that necessary action would be taken and the matter ends amicably.
In Aaj Ki Jandhta v. Government of Madhya Pradesh23, the complaint stated that there were anonymous threats f from anti-social elements after publishing a critical news item about the Congress (I) leader, Mr. Arjun Singh. The Public Relation Department stated that instruction had been issued by the Police Headquarters to be watchful and to give reasonable protection to the editor.
(d) Pressure and assault by government: In a democratic country the government is supposed to exercise vast powers conferred on it for the welfare of the society. But these powers are often misused for private gains or exercised on corrupt motives or arbitrarily and capriciously. In such cases the Press helps the people to know what the government has been doing. But this involves the wrath of the administration and retaliation.
In President, AISMNF v. Delhi Administration24, the complainant alleged that the daily was harassed by Delhi Administration for an article reproduced from one of the leading weeklies published from Delhi. An FIR was lodged against the daily and as a consequence the advertisements to the paper were stopped. The Deputy Secretary, Home, admitted that according to the screening committee, the content of the article was not objectionable and hence it was decided to drop the police case and restore advertisement.
Often authorities use their power discriminately in granting accreditation to newsmen or denial or registration or in releasing advertisement to papers. They may use this to force a newspaper to tow the official line. Same policy is often followed by them in restricting telephone or postal facilities etc. This may amount to indirect restriction of freedom of Press.
e) Denying accreditation to editors and journalists would affect the freedom of the Press because it creates a distinction among the journalists. This would interfere with their free expression of views.
(b) Registration: The Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 provides for the registration of newspapers. Often difficulties in getting registration arise. According to the Council, mere delay in granting registration does not ‘ amount to violation of Press freedom. The Council enunciated the following principles for eliminating unnecessary delay in getting registration 26.
iii) Expeditious disposal of applications, seeking instructions for authentication of declaration.
the newspaper because its editorials were critical of the administration. The Government being influenced by political consideration had denied advertisement to it.
(d) Other facilities: The Press Council has the right to entertain and adjudicate complaints involving denial of other facilities like telegraph, teleprinter, railway concession etc. Thus it is the duty of the Council to examine whether the authority exercised the discretion properly or arbitrarily.
In Saranga Correspondent v. Haryana Roadways28 shows how an interference by a journalist in favour of a boy who was travelling ticket less and was being manhandled by the employees of the State Road Transport Corporation, resulted in a cold war between the media and the Corporation. The Council observed that the Roadways and the Press were both institutions of public service working in a democracy. It expressed the hope that in future the complainant and the staff of the respondent would perform their respective role of public service in amity and peace with each other.
1 . In 1975 the number of councils was 25 according to Clement Johne, the famous editor and number of the Commonwealth Press Union. In 1980 the figures of media and Press Councils rose to 50 according to the Mc-Bride Report.
2. Press Complaints Commission was established in 1991.
1 0. (1 9989-90) A.R. 1 1 1.
1 1. Lalit Mohan Gautam v. Indian Express, (1 990-91) A.R. 1 22.
12. (1990-91) A.R. 1 01.
15. See Detailed discussion see Justice R. S. Sarkaria, A Guide to Journalistic Ethics (1 995) and Justice P. B. Sawant, Norms of Journalistic conduct (1996 Edn).
16. Justice V. S. Deshpande, Preface to Violation of Journalistic Ethics and Public Taste.
17. Regulation 3 of the Press Council (Procedure of Inquiry) Regulation, 1979.
19. Section 13(2)(e) of the Press Council of India Act, 1978.
1. A free press can flourish only in a free society. Communalism is a threat to the fabric of our free society and to the nation’s solidarity.
2. The press has a vital role to play in the consummation of the fundamental objectives enshrined in our Constitution, namely, democracy, secularism, national unity, and integrity and the rule of law. It is the duty of the press to help promote unity and cohesion in the hearts and minds of the people, and refrain from publishing material tending to excite communal passions or inflame communal hatred.
a) All editorial comments and other expressions of opinion, whether through articles, letters to the Editor, or in any other form should be restrained and free from scurrilous attacks against leaders or communities, and there should be no incitement to violence.
b) Generalised allegations casting doubts and aspersions on the Patriotism and loyalty of any community should be eschewed.
c) Likewise, generalised charges and allegations against any community of unfair discrimination, amounting to inciting communal hatred and distrust, must also be eschewed.
d) Whereas truth should not be suppressed, a deliberate slanting of news of communal incidents should be avoided.
e) News of incidents involving loss of life, lawlessness, arson, etc. should be described, reported, and headlined with restraint in strictly objective terms and should not be heavily displayed.
f) Items of news calculated to make for peace and harmony and help in the restoration and maintenance of law and order should be given prominence and precedence over other news.
g) The greatest caution should be exercised in the selection and publication of pictures, cartoons, poems, etc. so as to avoid arousing communal passions or hatred.
h) Names of communities should not be mentioned nor the terms “majority” and “minority” communities be ordinarily used in the course of reports.
i) The source from which casualty figures are obtained should always be indicated.
j) No facts or figures should be published without fullest possible verification. However, if the publication of the facts or figures is likely to have the effect of arousing communal passions, those facts and figures may not be given.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 V. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 V.