Sword of Damocles hanging over the media

Is media freedom in India dependent on the tender mercies of intelligence agencies which operate in secrecy?

The question has arisen in the context of the Central government’s revocation of the licence of Media One, a Malayalam-language news and current affairs channel, based at Kozhikode, Kerala.

Media One was on air for 10 years. During this period neither the Home Ministry, which is concerned with matters of internal security, nor the Ministries of Information Technology and Information and Broadcasting, which are involved in the licensing process of channels, raised any national security issues with it.

The regulations require private channels to renew licences at regular intervals. When Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited, owners of Media One, applied for renewal of its licence the government turned down the request on grounds of national security and public order.

It did not specifically identify any news broadcast by the channel or any other act committed by it which it considered objectionable from the viewpoint of security and public order.

The Narendra Modi administration has perhaps displayed more sensitivity on the issue of national security than any of its predecessors. The manner in which it handled Media One’s application for renewal of its licence suggests that security and public order infringements came up as an afterthought.

The channel’s licence was due to expire in September 2021. The media company filed an application for renewal of the licence in May, four months in advance. The government communicated no decision on its application until January 31, 2022. On that day the company was informed that its licence had been revoked, forcing it to stop transmission immediately.

It is difficult to believe that the Modi regime was ready to allow a media organisation, which it considered a security risk, to operate without a valid licence for more than four months.

In the 10 years it was on air, Media One earned a reputation as a respectable player in the crowded Malayalam television scene. Its closure threatened the livelihood of 385 journalists.

The media company challenged the revocation of its licence in the Kerala High Court. A single judge who heard the petition rejected its petition and upheld the government decision.

A division bench, to which the company appealed against the single judge’s order, also upheld the government decision.

The issue is now before a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice YV Chandrachud, in the form of an appeal against the High Court division bench’s order.

One of the arguments raised by the media house in the high court was that the government had not disclosed to it details of the alleged security issues. Consequently, it was not able to put up an effective defence.

The government placed before both the High Court benches files containing certain intelligence reports it had relied upon.

The practice of making available information in files to judges alone, denying access to the opposite side, has become fairly common under the Modi dispensation.

That this system does not go well with the principle of transparency, which is the hallmark of open court proceedings, did not seem to have worried some recent Chief Justices of India.

While taking up the media house’s appeal, Justice Chandrachud remarked that he was not an admirer of the system of producing files in sealed covers. However, he asked the government to produce the files it had relied upon to take the decision to revoke the licence.

He also asked the government to respond by March 15 to Media One’s plea for an interim order allowing it to resume telecasts, pending disposal of the appeal. When the matter came up again, Justice Chandrachud stayed the government’s order revoking the channel’s security clearance and licence. He said the channel could function as it did before the government order forced it to shut down. The apex court’s interim order is a big blow in favour of media freedom and democracy.

One hopes the court’s final order, which will come after detailed hearing, will remove forever the sword of Damocles hanging over the media.

Media One’s counsel, Dushyant Dave, had said if the court did not act no media in the country will be safe.

At one point he had also said his client was suffering because it belongs to the minority community. Media One is run by a company promoted by Jamaat-e-Islami. A trust floated by the group runs a Malayalam daily, Madhyamam, which has 16 editions, eight in India and eight in the GCC countries.

The best way to tackle any complaints the government or citizens may have against mediapersons or institutions is to set up a Media Council, on the lines of the Press Council, with representatives of various sections of society, including the media.