MEDIA TRIAL: ITS IMPACT AND LAWS GOVERNING MEDIA TRIAL IN INDIA BY - T. SRITHIGA
MEDIA TRIAL: ITS IMPACT AND LAWS GOVERNING MEDIA TRIAL IN INDIA
AUTHORED BY - T. SRITHIGA
ABSTRACT
The term
“MEDIA” refers to “MEDIUM”-which refers to communication or the way of
expression. The role of Journalism is primarily the communication of news,
information, updation and education. In the contemporary world, media has
become an important key to give “voice of the voiceless”. Media plays a vital
role in country’s development measures, National Integration and the fight for justice.
Media act as an interpreter for general public, and it also expose the face of
the truth amidst growing corruption. Journalism is an essential part of
democratic society. Media serve as a bridge between the government and the
public, “using media for social change is powerful” but these are lot of
challenges in it.
Media Trial
which the media does even before the court starts trial in a case is a crucial
issue till day. In this Article we will see about the role of media in trial
and their impacts on the society and judiciary and the laws regulating the
media in India.
Key words: Media Trial,
Fair Trial, Justice Administration, Democracy, Fourth Estate.
INTRODUCTION
The media is
seen as the fourth pillar of democracy, after the legislative, executive
branch, and judiciary. The media has a significant impact on influencing
people's perceptions and increasing awareness of social issues. An integral
component of a democracy is a free press. But by holding trials concurrently
with the courts, the media has overreached itself and entered the judicial
arena in recent years. A public court that does not accept the notions of
"innocent until proven guilty" and "guilty beyond reasonable
doubt" has had its work picked up by the media.
Media trials
typically start even before the courts had a chance to test the case; the media
does its own investigation and disseminates the information so that the public
may make up its mind either in favour of or against the accused before the
trial ever takes place. The accused's right to a fair trial is violated as a
result of these actions, which negatively affect the trial itself. Although the
media has received credit for increasing awareness over the past ten years,
they have mostly come under fire for their excessively intrusive coverage of
some topics, particularly those involving well-known people.These days, the
media has a big say in the outcome of high-profile trials, including evaluating
and making comments about the effectiveness of the court where the trial is
taking place. Numerous studies have effectively demonstrated the direct or
indirect impact of media trials on the legal system. Due to its detrimental
impact on society as a whole, media trials have become a significant issue in
India that need immediate attention.
MEDIA TRIAL
The term
"media trials" describes the practice of media sources, especially
newspapers and television channels, extensively covering a court case while
frequently taking on the roles of judge, prosecutor, and investigator. Even
before the court has rendered a decision, the public's impression of the
accused's guilt or innocence is often shaped by this widespread publicity. The
distinction between sensationalizing news and reporting facts is frequently
hazy during a media trial. Public opinion can be shaped by media
representation, which may result in biased opinions and have an impact on the
judicial system. Judges may feel under excessive pressure to take into account
public opinion shaped by media narratives as a result of this.
The
fundamental right to a fair trial, which is protected by Article 21 of the
Indian Constitution and protects the right to life and personal liberty, may be
compromised by media trials. They can result in character assassination and
social exclusion based on unsubstantiated information, and they can threaten
the assumption of innocence, which states that a person is innocent until
proven guilty. The media must appropriately use its freedom even though it is a
vital pillar of democracy since it guarantees accountability and transparency.
To keep media trials from jeopardizing justice, ethical journalism, following
the law, and respect for the legal system are crucial.
THE ROLE OF MEDIA IN A
DEMOCRATIC
SOCIETY
The media, sometimes known
as the fourth estate, plays an important function in a democratic society. It
serves as a watchdog, keeping the powerful accountable and creating a forum for
public debate. Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution provides the right
to free speech and expression, including freedom of the press. However, this
freedom is not unlimited and is subject to reasonable constraints in the
interests of Indian sovereignty and integrity, state security, public order, decency,
and morality.
MEDIA TRIALS AND FREEDOM
OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION
Freedom of expression is
critical to shaping public opinion on social, political, and economic issues.
Similarly, those in power must be able to keep the public informed about their plans
and goals; hence, freedom of expression is the mother of all rights.
In Printers (Mysore)
Ltd. v. CTO,[1]
the Supreme Court emphasized that, while freedom of the press is not officially
protected as a basic right, it is implied in freedom of speech and expression.
Freedom of the press has long been a valued right in all democratic countries,
and it is rightfully referred to be the fourth chamber of democracy.
In R. Rajagopal v.
State of Tamil Nadu,[2]
the Supreme Court of India ruled that freedom of the press includes engaging in
uninhabited discussion regarding public personalities' engagement in public
problems and events. However, in their private lives, a healthy balance of
press freedom, privacy, and defamation must be maintained in accordance with
the democratic way of life outlined in the Constitution. As a result, based on
the Supreme Court's findings in various cases and the views voiced by many
jurists, it is obvious that press freedom stems from the freedom of expression
given to all citizens under Article 19(1)(a).
MEDIA TRIAL AND FAIR TRIAL
Trial by media has created
a difficulty since it entails a tug of war between two opposing principles:
free press and free trial, both of which the public is deeply interested in.
The right of the public in a democracy to be active in current events that
concern them is the foundation of press freedom. This provides reason for
investigative and campaign journalism.
At the same time, the
Right to a Fair Trial, i.e., a trial free of external influences, is
acknowledged as a fundamental principle of justice in India. A journalist may
be held in contempt of court if he publishes anything that might influence a
'fair trial' or damages the Court's impartiality in deciding a cause on its
merits, regardless of whether the proceedings before the Court are criminal or
civil.
In Zahira Habibullah
Sheikh v. State of Gujarat,[3]
the Supreme Court clarified that a fair trial requires an unbiased judge, a
fair prosecutor, and a peaceful court atmosphere. A fair trial is one in which
any bias or prejudice for or against the accused, witnesses, or the cause being
tried is eradicated.
MEDIA TRIAL AND RIGHT TO
BE REPRESENTED
Every individual has the
right to be represented by a lawyer of his choice and submit his case before
the adjudicating court, and no one has the authority to prevent him from doing
so. For example, when prominent lawyer Ram Jethmalani agreed to defend Manu
Sharma, a major accused in a murder case, he faced public ridicule. A top
editor of the television news channel questioned the choice to represent
Sharma.
THE MEDIA TRIAL AND
JUDICIARY
The judiciary's
fundamental goal is to conduct fair trials and provide justice free of
extraneous influences. This independence is critical to sustaining public faith
in the judicial system. However, media trials, in which the media forms and
disseminates opinions on ongoing legal issues, can generate public pressure,
thereby compromising court neutrality. According to Section 2(c) of the
Contempt of Court Act of 1971, media trials are considered contempt of court
because they interfere with the judicial process by releasing views on cases
that are still in progress.[4]
The Impact:
A 'trial by media' might
put excessive pressure on the court and judge. Media coverage, particularly
when biased or sensationalized, can generate an atmosphere of public feeling
and pressure, which may have an indirect impact on court proceedings. While it
is expected that a judge operating in their professional position should be
immune to such influences, it is important to recognize the subtle and
not-so-subtle effects that media coverage may produce. This is especially true
in judicial systems with juries, which are made up of members of the general
public who might be affected by media narratives.
Media Trial and Judiciary
Social Pressure
Media trials produce
enormous societal pressure, hampering judges' efforts to stay unbiased. The
media's representation of the accused has the potential to affect public
opinion and, indirectly, court judgments. This cultural pressure may lead to
judges developing predetermined beliefs, making it impossible to conduct an
unbiased trial.
Erosion of judicial
authority
Media trials can weaken
judicial authority. In high-profile instances, such as the 26/11 Mumbai
attacks, the media prematurely announced the accused's penalty, undermining the
court's function and authority. The judicial process must be free of such
extraneous pressures in order for decisions to be made entirely on legal
principles and facts.
Disruption to Justice
Administration
The Constitution requires
a fair judicial procedure for all offenses, regardless of severity. Media
involvement upsets this process since it frequently goes beyond giving accurate
updates and into speculative reporting. This disturbs the administration of
justice and undermines the concept of a fair trial.
Impact on the Accused
A 'trial by media' can be
especially harmful to the accused. If the media depicts the accused negatively,
even before the court has rendered a decision, it might lead to a presumption
of guilt. This not only violates their right to a fair trial, but it may also
do irreversible harm to their reputation and mental health. Even if the accused
is eventually convicted, they may incur societal stigma as a result of the
media trial.
Impact on Society
A 'trial by media' has
far-reaching consequences for society. On the one hand, it can lead to a more
informed public, increasing awareness about critical issues and exposing faults
in the legal system. However, it runs the risk of producing a society in which
guilt and innocence are determined by popular mood rather than due process.
This can lead to a culture of trial by public opinion, in which media
narratives trump facts and judicial processes.
The 'trial by media,'
while a powerful instrument for openness and accountability, nevertheless poses
complicated ethical, justice, and fair trial issues. It highlights the need of
responsible journalism that strikes a balance between the right to report and
the rights of individuals.
LAWS GOVERNING MEDIA IN
INDIA
The Indian constitution: The Indian
Constitution's Article 19(1)(a) guarantees the basic right to freedom of speech
and expression. It lays the groundwork for media independence in India.
However, this right is not absolute and may be subject to reasonable
limitations.
The Press Council of India
Act of 1978: The Press Council of India (PCI) is a self-regulatory body. It was
established to preserve journalistic ethics and standards. It regulates the
behavior of India's print media.
The Cable Television
Networks (Regulation) Act of 1995: This Act governs the functioning of cable television
networks in India. It allows the central government to issue program and
advertisement codes. This is to control the material transmitted on television
stations.
The Broadcasting Services
Regulations (2011): These rules regulate the functioning of broadcasting
services in India. They define the content standards and duties of
broadcasters.
The Information Technology
Act of 2000: This statute is usually referred to as the IT statute. It establishes a
legislative framework for the regulation of digital media in India. It contains
measures for intermediary responsibility, cybercrime prevention, and data
protection.
The Advertising Standards
Council of India's (ASCI) Code The ASCI is a self-regulatory organization. It
establishes and maintains standards for advertising in India. The ASCI Code
addresses several areas of advertising, such as truthfulness, decency, and
social responsibility.
The Cinematograph Act
(1952):
This Act governs the production, exhibition, and certification of films in
India. It allows the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to certify
films based on a variety of factors.[5]
Case laws
In the landmark case of "R.K.
Anand v. Registrar, Delhi High Court"[6]
the Apex Court for the first time said that a media concurrent trial had no
legal validity in our legal system since it puts the rights to "free
speech and expression" and "right to a fair trial" at odds.
In "Shreya Singhal
v. Union of India"[7]
the Supreme Court once more addressed this issue, stating that while it is
allowed to debate or support a cause, even if it is controversial, when it
proceeds unchecked, it is recommended that laws be put in place to control it.
To put it another way, the court was saying that while media trials are morally
and legally acceptable when they are conducted within the bounds necessary to
guarantee a thorough investigation and an unbiased trial, they must be illegal
when they go beyond that bound and are broadcast solely to create a sensation
and make money.
CONCLUSION
To sum up, no
freedom can be regarded as total; hence, even the freedom of the press and
media is subject to some limitations in order to protect the public interest.
Any democratic institution, whether it be the legislature, the courts, or the
executive branch, will inevitably be abused if it is granted unfettered
independence. It is advised that the media exercise some degree of
self-regulation over its territory, even though the efforts made to closely
monitor the police investigation and carry out sting operations are
commendable. The right to a fair trial should be respected by the media, and
interference with court proceedings should be avoided.
As long as it
only serves as a catalyst and refrains from intruding in the judiciary by
finding one of the parties guilty before the trial, the media will benefit
them. The media should be aware of the distinction between assisting the court
in administering justice and impeding it by interfering and going beyond its
bounds. Reporting the case's facts and circumstances is the media's
responsibility, but the judiciary alone has the authority to make decisions.