This report by the Free Speech Collective (FSC) examines the current state of freedom of speech and expression in Jammu and Kashmir over the last six years. Drawing from a combination of news reports, government policies, police actions, and anonymous testimonies from journalists and citizens, it highlights the many challenges faced by the press in Kashmir since the 2019 reorganization. From censorship and intimidation to arrests under draconian laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Public Security Act (PSA), journalists have been systematically silenced. The shrinking space for independent media, the erasure of critical newspaper archives, and the heavy reliance on government advertising have further constrained the press.

The report also explores the growing use of self-censorship as a survival strategy among journalists, the repression of free movement through the cancellation of passports, and the chilling effect on investigative journalism. As the territory heads into elections, this report raises critical questions about the state of democracy in Jammu and Kashmir. It asks whether, in the midst of such suppression, the media will be able to function freely, and whether voters will be adequately informed as they go to the polls.

Following is the detailed overview provided in the report that explores how events in Jammu and Kashmir have unfolded since 2019 and how they may influence the upcoming elections:

Brief timeline:

Pre-Abrogation Crackdown on Media (2109): As provided in the report, in the lead-up to the abrogation of Article 370, restrictions on the press began tightening. On July 25, 2019, journalist Qazi Shibli was detained under the Public Safety Act (PSA) for tweeting about troop movements. By August 4, 2019, a total communication blackout was imposed, cutting off all internet and phone services. The very next day, Section 144 was enforced in parts of Srinagar, restricting journalists’ movement and their ability to report freely.

During this period, the report provides that newspapers like The Kashmir Times and Greater Kashmir suspended publication, and when they resumed, self-censorship became the norm. Journalists like Irfan Amin Malik and Peerzada Ashiq were detained and questioned for their reporting, while others such as Gowhar Geelani and Zahid Rafiq were barred from traveling abroad.

Escalating Restrictions from 2020 to 2021: According to the report, in January 2020, the Supreme Court had ruled that indefinite internet suspension was illegal. However, the actual restoration of 4G services in Jammu and Kashmir was delayed until February 2021, more than a year after the ruling. The report depicted how throughout 2020, journalists faced increased harassment. Reporters like Mushtaq Ahmed Ganai were arrested, and Masrat Zahra and Gowhar Geelani were charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for their work.

Notably, the reports also pointed to the introduction of a restrictive media policy in May 2020, which further tightened government control over news. In April 2021, the police banned live coverage of security encounters, further curbing journalistic freedom. High-profile arrests, like those of Manan Dar and Fahad Shah, and raids on journalists’ homes became increasingly common.

Shutdown of the Kashmir Press Club and the Suppression of Dissent (2022-2023): The crackdown reached a new level in January 2022, when the Jammu and Kashmir administration shut down the Kashmir Press Club, a key institution for journalists in the region. The press club was controversially reinstated in 2024, but many saw the move as a tactic to control dissent, especially since it was done with the backing of the administration and lacked transparency.

Meanwhile, the report showed how arrests continued during this period as well. Irfan Mehraj, editor of Wande Magazine, was arrested in March 2023 under the draconian UAPA, even as Khurram Parvez, a prominent human rights activist, remains jailed under terrorism charges.

Intensified Suppression and Legal Battles (Late 2023 and 2024): In the latter part of 2023, freedom of speech and civil liberties remained under threat. On November 19, 2023, seven students were arrested under the UAPA for allegedly celebrating Australia’s cricket victory over India with pro-Pakistan slogans. Although the charges were eventually dropped, it highlighted the severe consequences of dissent in the region. That same day, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh quashed the detention of journalist Sajjad Gul, criticizing the abuse of preventive detention laws by authorities.

The report further provided that in December 2023, the Supreme Court upheld the abrogation of Article 370, a decision that the government framed as a victory for peace and development. However, this was far away from the reality where civil rights advocates remained concerned about the broader implications for democracy and free speech in Jammu and Kashmir. These events provided in the report clearly shows that even as the region moves closer to the 2024 elections, journalists and media personnel continue to face harassment and arrests. On January 30, 2024, the Supreme Court ordered the publication of internet shutdown review orders, a move aimed at increasing transparency. Meanwhile, arrests like that of journalist Aasif Sultan in February 2024 and businessman Tarun Behl in July 2024 underscored the attempts of suppression by an unrelenting union government.

Can the Ballot Promise Press Freedom?

As evidenced by the report, the sustained erosion of media freedom, rampant use of draconian laws, and constant harassment of journalists since 2019 have deeply impacted the political and social landscape of Jammu and Kashmir. As the region approaches the 2024 elections, the suppression of free speech is likely to shape both voter sentiment and political discourse. How these developments will influence the elections remains to be seen, but the government’s continued efforts to control the narrative raise questions about the future of democracy in the region.

The report ends by stating that though political parties have promised to restore press freedom ahead of Jammu and Kashmir’s upcoming elections, real change seems unlikely. The report underscores that the J&K Reorganisation Act of 2019 and subsequent amendments have significantly limited the powers of any elected government. Furthermore, the report highlights how even the past administrations, including those led by the National Conference, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and the Indian National Congress, also had strained relations with the press, imposing censorship and curbing media freedoms during times of unrest.

Based on this, the report states that “In the face of these past examples and given the increasingly repressive atmosphere in which the media operates since the abrogation of Article 370, there is little hope that the new government will offer a space for the media to operate freely.”

The complete report may be read below:

Related:

Manipur plunges into deeper turmoil amid fresh violence and drone attacks since early September

Assembly Polls: SKM to Campaign for BJP’s Defeat in Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir

On Yaum-Al-Quds 2024, Massive Rallies Renew Call For Al-Aqsa Liberation In Kashmir, Kargil

Jammu & Kashmir HC: Being a critic of government no ground to detain a person, detaining authorities apply no mind

Unabated Conversion Of Agricultural Land In Kashmir Threatens Food Security

Meeras Mahal: A Journey Through Kashmir’s Timeless Heritage

The post Vanishing Media Freedom J & K, 2019-2024: Free Speech Collective appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Bloomberg article written by Anto Anthony and Saikat Das claimed that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) had found a hole of more than $240 million in the accounts of Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd, and this amount, which was diverted illegally, is 10 times higher than the SEBI investigators had initially estimated, Indian Express reported.

The SC in its order of March 22 has said that “A cursory reproduction of the submissions and precedents before the court is not sufficient. The court must explain how the test is satisfied and how the precedents cited apply to the facts of the case.” The three-fold test used to grant interim injunctions in defamation suits consists of (i) a prima facie case, (ii) balance of convenience and (iii) irreparable loss or harm to the concerned party.

The apex court further expressed surprise over the role of Delhi High Court in upholding the District Court order and said the High Court should have intervened in the first place when such an order which restricted the freedom of press and right to information was passed by the subordinate court under its jurisdiction.

Further, the Supreme Court in its March 22 order cautioned against the threat to freedom of speech, especially freedom of press, arising from rising instances of SLAPP suits. Its order recorded that the term “‘SLAPP’ stands for ‘Strategic Litigation against Public Participation’ and is an umbrella term used to refer to litigation predominantly initiated by entities that wield immense economic power against members of the media or civil society, to prevent the public from knowing about or participating in important affairs in the public interest”.

Delhi High Court

The Supreme Court was also critical of the Delhi High Court’s conduct in the case, and pointed out that appellate courts need to intervene in cases where the subordinate courts have exercised their discretion “arbitrarily, capriciously, perversely, or where the court has ignored settled principles of law regulating the grant or refusal of interlocutory injunction.” It remarked that the single judge bench of High Court has committed the same error as the trial judge, significantly in the matter affecting right to free speech.

Saket Court, New Delhi

Justice Harjyot Singh Bhalla of Saket District Court on March 1, 2024, had passed the ex-parte and pre-trial injunction order against Bloomberg in the defamation suit filed by Zee entertainment. It recorded that the stock price of the company fell by almost 15% because of the circulation of the defamatory material. Zee alleged that the article was published to malign and defame it, with a pre-meditated and malafide intention. Consequently, the court granted the injunction order against Bloomberg using three-fold test, directing it to take down the article within 7 days. The order reads, “In my view, the plaintiff has made out a prima facie case for passing ad interim ex-parte orders of injunction, balance of convenience is also in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant and irreparable loss and injury may be caused to the plaintiff, if the injunction as prayed for is not granted.” Notably, the judge had merely recorded that “I have gone through the record available as on date”, without providing any further reasons for supporting the order.

The Saket District Court order may be read here:

What was the Bloomberg article about

The Bloomberg article written by Anto Anthony and Saikat Das claimed that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) had found a hole of more than $240 million in the accounts of Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd, and this amount, which was diverted illegally, is 10 times higher than the SEBI investigators had initially estimated, Indian Express reported.

Rejecting the appeal filed by Bloomberg on March 14, the Delhi High bench of Justice Shalinder Kaur maintained in its order that “A reading of the impugned order suggests that the learned ADJ applied his mind to the facts of this case and satisfied himself that prima facie there was enough material to come to the conclusion for the purpose of granting an ex-parte ad-interim injunction…” Pertinently, SC rejected this view of the High Court, and found the District Court’s order lacking any application of mind.

The High Court order may be read here:

Empowering free media against SLAPP suits by corporate giants

The present SC order setting aside the previous orders of the trial judge and High Court and asking the former to hear the arguments afresh keeping in mind the order of apex court is a move in the right direction, and strengthens the cause of independent fearless media.

The verdict maintained that the three-fold test used for granting injunction orders cannot be applied mechanically to the detriment of the other party, and public at large. Importantly, it links the question of defamation and pre-trail ex-parte injunctions to the broader issues of free speech, press freedom, and right to information of the public. The court emphasised that the three-fold test alone is not sufficient and other factors need to be incorporated before an ex-parte injunction is granted, citing its decision in Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund v. Kartick Das. It also noted that ex parte injunction could be granted only under exceptional circumstances, and additional consideration of balancing the fundamental right to free speech with the right to reputation and privacy must be borne in mind, especially with regard to suits filed against journalists.

The bench comprising CJI, Justice Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra said that the Bonnard standard, as established in the decision of Bonnard v. Perryman, need to be followed in all the cases of pre-trial interim injunctions. Relying on the aforementioned case, the bench noted that “‘Until it is clear that an alleged libel is untrue, it is not clear that any right at all has been infringed; and the importance of leaving free speech unfettered is a strong reason in cases of libel for dealing most cautiously and warily with the granting of interim injunctions.’” Citing Fraser v. Envas, the order observes that even if the article is defamatory, if the defendant says that he intends to justify it or to make fair comment on a matter of public interest then there should be no restrain on the publication of such material, as it is in the public interest that the truth should come out.

The verdict said that “Granting interim injunctions, before the trial commences, in a cavalier manner results in the stifling of public debate. In other words, courts should not grant ex-parte injunctions except in exceptional cases where the defence advanced by the respondent would undoubtedly fail at trial. In all other cases, injunctions against the publication of material should be granted only after a full-fledged trial is conducted or in exceptional cases, after the respondent is given a chance to make their submissions.”

Commenting on SLAPP suits pursued by vested economic interests, especially corporate behemoths, the judges remarked that such interim pre-trial injunctions “often act as a ‘death sentence’ to the material sought to be published, well before the allegations have been proven.” Thus, the bench remained cognizant of the fact that SLAPP suits have been weaponised by the companies to silence critical voices and prevent public from accessing the truth.

Finally, disposing of the matter, the Supreme Court ordered the trial court to hear the petition afresh, keeping in mind the factors mentioned by it.

The SC order may be read here:

Related:

Don’t victimise activists – they stand between us and tyranny

The case against Sedition

The post Freedom of press under threat from SLAPP suits: SC sets aside Saket Court Order in Bloomberg vs Zee Entertainment case appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Gaon Savera is a multi-media outlet run by a young journalist, Mandeep Punia, who in the past was arrested for covering the farmers’ protests in the Tikri, Singhu and Ghazipur borders of Delhi. His media outlet carries news and views on village life and agriculture.

Mainstream media has largely remained silent on the demonstrations by farmers and their demands. Now, even small independent platforms such as Gaon-Savera that takes a pro farmers and pro people stand are being targeted. Along with Gaon Savera, the social media accounts of many farmer leaders have also been frozen.

Meanwhile, three days ago the website and the social media accounts of the Srinagar based news portal The Kashmir Walla were also frozen. Its editor Fahad Shah had already been arrested in February 2022, had been charged under UAPA and languishes in jail. A former trainee reporter Sajad Gul is in a jail in Uttar Pradesh.

Closing down news portals, you tube channels and social media accounts is becoming a common tactic by governments, both in the states and at the centre. Prolonged internet bans, as in Manipur and Kashmir, are also becoming common. India is becoming infamous as the internet shutdown capital of the world, with the largest number of deliberate disruptions of the internet. The Delhi Union of Journalists calls for an end to all such arbitrary practices that bode ill for a free media and democracy.

The DUJ statement has been issued by Sujata Madhok, President,   S.K. Pande, Vice President and Jigeesh A.M., General Secretary.

The post DUJ Protests freezing of media accounts appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Soon after the telecast of the interview and wide public criticism of the Government on the social media platform, the ruling establishment found itself in an embarrassing situation. Had the statement been made by a leader of the opposition party, the mainstream media might have encountered it easily and the ED, IT, and police could have raided his/her house. But the allegation came from a former CEO of Twitter, who is a US citizen. Given this reality, the Modi government resorted to the “sovereignty” principle to shrug off the charges.

The person who came out to defend the Government was Union Minister of State Rajeev Chandrasekhar. Without citing strong evidence, the minister rejected Dorsey’s statement as “an outright lie”. In his Tweet (July 13), Chandrasekhar made counter-allegations that Twitter India “had a problem accepting the sovereignty of Indian law”. Dismissing the charge of censorship, he argued that “misinformation” was in circulation during the farmers’ protests and Twitter was obliged to “remove misinformation” under Indian laws.

Chandrasekhar’s explanation leaves many questions unanswered. For example, Dorsey was not the first person to question the shrinking media space under the Modi rule. Moreover, the “sovereignty” principle — which may be defined as the State being the only legitimate actor to make laws within its territory without any external interference — has become a magic tool in the hands of the ruling establishment to brush aside any external criticism about human rights violation and assault journalists within India. But when any foreign media writes a single line in praise of PM Modi, it is hugely celebrated as the rise of India under his leadership.

Jack Dorsey was not the first person to point to the state of duress under which journalists and social media creators work in India. Earlier Twitter owner Elon Musk, in an interview with BBC, pointed to the prevalence of “quite strict” rules for social media. Apart from them, a large number of journalists were also arrested. For example, Siddique Kappan, a Kerala-based journalist, was jailed under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, (UAPA) and sedition law three years ago and kept in jail for 846 days. His only “crime” was that he tried to reach Hathras, Uttar Pradesh, to do a ground report about an alleged rape and murder of a young Dalit woman. Getting bail for an accused charged with UAPA becomes remote. Similarly, the sedition law (Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code), too, has been grossly misused. Enacted by the British Raj in 1860, it was used against the freedom fighters. However the “nationalist” BJP government has little hesitation in invoking the colonial law against its people.

Media reports suggest that Twitter was asked by the Modi Government to suspend as many as 1,200 accounts for their alleged “Khalistan” links during farmers’ protests in 2021. Following the instruction, Twitter blocked some accounts but later revoked the blocking. Such a move angered the Government, which was desperate to control the rising tide of farmers’ unrest. While the mainstream media was obediently following the Government’s line by defending the farm laws and demonizing protesters with wild allegations, several social media platforms emerged to counter the official narrative. Caught in such an embarrassing situation, the Central Government wanted Twitter to fully toe its line. But Twitter went on to flag some posts of the leaders of the ruling parties in May 2021. This further irritated the Government and it became so furious that it accused the opposition party of “manipulating” the media to malign PM Modi’s image and that of the Central Government. Later, the ruling establishment rushed Delhi police to Twitter’s office in Gurgaon and served it a notice. Chandrasekhar, the minister, completely ignored these details, while calling Dorsey’s “ an outright lie”.

Even reliable figures weigh against the minister’s claim. The figures of the National Crime Records Bureau for 2019 show that the number of people arrested under the UAPA has seen an increase of over 72% from 2015. Many of the arrested persons must have been journalists. From the valley of Kashmir to the Adivasi lands in central India, from the Hindi heartland in Uttar Pradesh to the western and southern India states of Gujarat and Karnataka, the BJP regime targeted journalists. In December 2022, the report of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) pointed to the high rate of journalists being jailed in India. Six months later, CPJ issued another statement dated April 20, 2023, and said that “In March 2023, India saw several attacks on press freedom, including the arrest of Kashmiri journalist Irfan Mehraj; the suspension in India of Twitter handles belonging to an outlet and at least three journalists; and death threats to journalist and fact-checker Mohammad Zubair”. Writing in The New York Times (March 8), Anuradha Bhasin, executive editor of The Kashmir Times, also gave horrible accounts of the sufferings of journalists in Jammu and Kashmir and the muzzling of free speech, post-abrogation of article 370. (Courtesy: News Trail)

(Dr. Abhay Kumar is a Delhi-based journalist. He has taught political science at the Non-Collegiate Women’s Education Board of Delhi University. Email: debatingissues@gmail.com)

The post The Shrinking Space for Free Media under Modi rule appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“Since Prime Minister Modi came to power in 2014, there has been an increasing crackdown on India’s media,” said CPJ President Jodie Ginsberg. “Journalists critical of the government and the BJP party have been jailed, harassed, and surveilled in retaliation for their work. India is the world’s largest democracy, and it needs to live up to that by ensuring a free and independent media–and we expect the United States to make this a core element of discussions.”

On Wednesday, June 14, CPJ convened an online panel, “India’s Press Freedom Crisis,” with opening remarks and moderation by Ginsberg alongside panellists Geeta Seshu, founding editor of the Free Speech Collective watchdog group; Anuradha Bhasin, executive editor of the Kashmir Times newspaper; and Shahina K.K., senior editor for Outlook magazine.

The panelists discussed the deterioration of press freedom over the last decade, with Seshu detailing the rise in censorship and “vicious” attacks on the media, while Shahina shared her ongoing battle to fight terrorism charges filed nearly 13 years ago by the Karnataka state government, then led by Modi’s BJP party, in retaliation for her investigative reporting.

Bhasin spoke about the “effective silence” that Kashmiri journalists have dealt with since the Modi government unilaterally revoked Jammu and Kashmir’s special autonomy status in 2019, with multiple cases of reporters being detained and interrogated.

CPJ calls on the U.S. government to urge India to act on the following press freedom violations:

• The ongoing detention of six journalists–Aasif Sultan, Gautam Navlakha, Sajad Gul, Fahad Shah, Rupesh Kumar Singh, and Irfan Mehraj–in retaliation for their work. All have been targeted under draconian security laws. Shah faces trial on spurious terrorism charges in relation to a 2011 article published by his online magazine The Kashmir Walla. The other five journalists remain in pre-trial detention.
• The harassment of the domestic and foreign media, including routine raids and retaliatory income tax investigations launched into critical news outlets. In February, income tax authorities raided the BBC’s offices in Delhi and Mumbai after the government censored a critical documentary on Modi by the broadcaster. Foreign correspondents say they have faced increasing visa uncertainties, restricted access to several areas of the country, including Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, and even threats of deportation in retaliation for critical reporting in recent years.
• The media crackdown in Kashmir, including the use of preventative detention, terrorism and criminal cases, travel bans, raids, and summons for questioning in retaliation for journalists’ work. In 2020, the government enacted a stringent media policy outlining powers for authorities to accredit the media, distribute government advertisements, and determine what constitutes “fake news.”
• Ongoing impunity in cases of killed journalists. At least 62 journalists have been killed in India in connection with their work since 1992. India ranked 11th on CPJ’s 2022 impunity index, with unsolved cases of at least 20 journalists killed in retaliation for their work from September 1, 2012, to August 31, 2022.
• Digital media restrictions, including using the IT Rules, 2021, to censor critical journalism, including the BBC documentary on Modi. India led the world in internet shutdowns for the fifth year in 2022, impeding press freedom and the ability of journalists to work freely.

The post Biden administration should press Indian Prime Minister on media freedom during his visit: CPJ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Press Council Of India Takes Suo Motu Cognizance Of The Incident Of Assault on Journalist Sakshi Joshi by Delhi Police For Covering #JantarMantarprotest by Wresters@sakshijoshii @DelhiPolice pic.twitter.com/7DDJ2SEln6

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) May 9, 2023

On May 3, the protesters were allegedly abused by Delhi Police, with several videos of the incident going viral on social media. The videos show the protesters being surrounded by male police officers who reportedly pushed them without any women officers present. It is claimed that two protesters were injured, and a drunk cop misbehaved with and hurled abuse at female wrestlers.

Joshi, an independent digital journalist, was among the reporters who sought to cover the wrestlers’ protest on May 4. However, in a video she posted on Twitter, Joshi is seen being manhandled and detained by police. Some officers of Delhi Police can be seen asking reporters to move away while one police personnel was asking others to take away the phones of the journalists present there. When Joshi questioned why they were being detained, the official said they would be told about it later. Joshi also showed on video how her clothes were torn while she was being manhandled.

She also showed on video that she was let off in the middle of a deserted road outside Mandir Marg police station around 1.30 am and asked to go home.

आधी रात में पहलवानों पर हमला
मुझे हिरासत में लिया, धक्के मारे , कपड़े फाड़े , कैमरा छीना

ये है @narendramodi की @DelhiPolice pic.twitter.com/aL5jzKBOWN

— Sakshi Joshi (@sakshijoshii) May 3, 2023

Various press bodies, including the Indian Women Press Corps, the National Alliance of Journalists, and the Delhi Union of Journalists, have condemned the incident and called for an inquiry. The New York-based  Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) also demanded an impartial investigation. DIGIPUB News India Foundation released a statement on May 5 condemning the police’s actions and censorship of journalists on World Press Freedom Day.

Statement on the mistreatment of journalist & DIGIPUB member Sakshi Joshi by the Delhi police. pic.twitter.com/k0sWPLpNFc

— DIGIPUB News India Foundation (@DigipubIndia) May 5, 2023

Joshi has sent a complaint to Delhi Police Commissioner Sanjay Arora demanding an inquiry. The incident has sparked widespread outrage and calls for action against the concerned police personnel.
Related:

Protesting wrestlers manhandled by drunk Delhi police officer at night, supporters and journalists detained

WFI leadership accused of sexual harassment by Indian women wrestlers, absence of redressal mechanisms the focus

The post PCI Takes Suo Moto Cognizance of Journalist Sakshi Joshi’s Manhandling by Delhi Police at Wrestlers’ Protest Site appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Why has the NIA arrested Kashmiri journalist Irfan Mehraj in a ‘terror funding’ case?
March 22, 2023

Delhi police cancels public meeting, still afraid of the “K” word!
March 17, 2023

New Tales in Kashmir’s New Order : The Forgotten Stories
February 28, 2023

When Story-tellers Are Criminalised : New Tales in Kashmir’s New Order
February 27, 2023

#JournalismIsNotACrime but can Kashmir’s Journalism Students Take the Risk?

February 28, 2022

CPJ, rights groups, and publications call for release of Fahad Shah and other Kashmiri journalists
February 25, 2022

Kashmirwalla editor Fahad Shah still in police custody
February 14, 2022

Fahad Shah and the saga of revolving door arrests
September 20, 2022

Journalist Qazi Shibli : “… it was like they were constantly snatching books and pens from me ”
April 27, 2020

One Year in the Abyss: Voices from Kashmir
August 4, 2020

Intimidation, curbs on movement and Internet severely restricted information flow in Kashmir
July 29, 2020

Still no full Internet restoration in Kashmir: SC order
May 19, 2020

As free journalism disappears from Kashmir, its stories remain buried
April 26, 2020

Kashmir police intimidate media: UAPA against photojournalist Masrat Zahra and fake news charge against Peerzada Ashiq
April 20, 2020

Majority of the government’s ‘whitelist’ sites for Kashmiris unusable!
January 28, 2020

Kashmir Internet ban to continue, Nodal officers to check usage on a daily basis
January 15, 2020 • ( Leave a comment )

Kashmir: Long road to press freedom
January 13, 2020

काटेरी तारेच्या पलीकडल्या बातम्या – काश्मीरमधील माहिती-बंदी
November 20, 2019

कंटीली तारों से घायल खबर : कश्मीर की सूचनाबंदी – 6 (अंतिम)
October 9, 2019

कंटीली तारों से घायल खबर : कश्मीर की सूचनाबंदी – 5
October 7, 2019

कंटीली तारों से घायल खबर : कश्मीर की सूचनाबंदी – 4
October 2, 2019

कंटीली तारों से घायल खबर : कश्मीर की सूचनाबंदी – 3
September 30, 2019

कंटीली तारों से घायल खबर : कश्मीर की सूचनाबंदी – 2
September 28, 2019

कंटीली तारों से घायल खबर : कश्मीर की सूचनाबंदी – 1
September 24, 2019

50th Day of Communication Blockade in Kashmir!
September 23, 2019

Demand to lift communication and press curbs in Jammu and Kashmir
September 13, 2019

Video: News Behind the Barbed Wire – Voices From Behind Kashmir’s Information Blockade
September 9, 2019

NEWS BEHIND THE BARBED WIRE : Kashmir’s Information Blockade
September 4, 2019

Press Council of India must intervene to rescind the ban on communication in Kashmir, say journalists
August 24, 2019

Restore Internet in Kashmir and #KeepItOn
August 20, 2019

Information Blackout in Kashmir: Kashmir Times editor Anuradha Bhasin PIL on media curbs
August 11, 2019

End the Lockdown in Jammu and Kashmir, restore communication forthwith, demands Free Speech Collective
August 8, 2019

Courtesy: freespeechcollective.in

The post Media freedom in Kashmir after Art.370 abrogation appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday , April 5, struck a decisive blow against the ban on Media One, a channel run by the Jamaat-e-Islami in Kerala. In so doing, the court upheld free speech and media freedom, saying critical views on government policy cannot be construed as anti-establishment and setting aside the Centre’s order revoking the licence of the Malayalam news channel Media One.

A  bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud brushed aside the Centre’s claims of “security concerns” and the media house’s purported links with the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, which in any case is not a banned organisation.

In telling observations that have a bearing on several contemporary topics, the top court said: “A homogenised view on issues that range from socio-economic polity to political ideologies would pose grave dangers to democracy…. The critical views of the channel, Media One, on policies of the government cannot be termed anti-establishment.”

Moreover , the two-judge bench that included Justice Hima Kohli went on to hold that  “the use of such a terminology (anti-establishment) in itself represents an expectation that the press must support the establishment”.

The action of the information and broadcasting ministry “by denying security clearance to a media channel on the basis of the views, which the channel is constitutionally entitled to hold, produces a chilling effect on free speech, and in particular on media freedom. Criticism of government policy can by no stretch of imagination be brought within the fold of any of the grounds stipulated in Article 19(2) (reasonable restrictions in the interests of the security and sovereignty of India)”, the bench said.

The bench passed the verdict while allowing the appeal filed by Madhyamam Broadcasting Ltd that runs the channel, the trade union of working journalists, Media One editor Pramod Raman and others, challenging the Centre’s refusal to renew the licence.

The court asked the union government to renew the licence of the channel within four weeks. “MIB (ministry of information and broadcasting) shall now proceed to issue renewal permissions in terms of this judgment within four weeks and all other authorities shall co-operate in issuing necessary approvals. The interim order (stay on licence revocation) of this court shall continue to operate until the renewal permissions are granted,” the bench added. 

Penning the 133-page judgment, Justice Chandrachud minced no words in expressing strong misgivings about the government’s approach to submit a “sealed cover” before Kerala High Court over the alleged security concerns regarding the operation of the channel, the manner in which the single judge accepted the sealed cover reports, which was subsequently affirmed by a division bench of the high court.

“We are of the opinion that the respondents (Union home and I&B ministries) by not providing a reasoned order denying the renewal of licence, not disclosing the relevant material and by disclosing the material only to the court in a sealed cover have violated the appellant’s right to a fair hearing protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. The respondents were unable to prove that the restrictions on the appellants’ right to a fair hearing were reasonable,” the court said.

The bench then set aside, “on the ground of the infringement of procedural guarantees”, the I&B ministry’s order denying permission to renew the licence.

The court asserted that freedom of the press, which is protected as a component of Article 19(1)(a), can only be restricted on the grounds stipulated in Article 19(2) of the Constitution.

The grounds stipulated in Article 19(2) include the “sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with Foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence”.

The court said: “The denial of security clearance to operate a news channel is a restriction on the freedom of the press, and such restriction is constitutionally permissible only on the grounds stipulated in Article 19(2) of the Constitution. An independent press is vital for the robust functioning of a democratic republic. Its role in a democratic society is crucial, for it shines a light on the functioning of the State. “The press has a duty to speak truth to power and present citizens with hard facts enabling them to make choices that propel democracy in the right direction.”

“The restriction on the freedom of the press compels citizens to think along the same tangent. A homogenised view on issues that range from socioeconomic polity to political ideologies would pose grave dangers to democracy,” Justice Chandrachud observed.

The SC judgement may be read here:

Related:

2023 Goenka Awards for excellence in journalism, IE editor in chief Rajkamal Jha turns the spotlight on media arrests

Stand up for media freedom & ethical journalism: NWMI

The post SC for freedom of expression: Strikes down ban on Media One appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In the wake of increasing attacks on the freedom of the media in India, the NWMI’s 17th National Meeting (January 27-29,2023) in Patna, Bihar, calls upon journalists, media workers and the public to stand up for press freedom, ethical journalism, gender equality and social justice.

A statement issued by the Network of Women in the Media (NWMI) on January 30, states that “New forms of censorship are being regularly deployed to further intimidate and muzzle the media. Recent measures include the draft amendment to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021 on fake news, the blocking of the BBC documentary, legal attacks on journalists’ right to protect their sources of news and removal of safeguards for journalists in the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill.

“Increased surveillance and the takedown of social media posts have become normalised. The continued foisting of motivated cases against and incarceration of journalists is unacceptable. The undeclared travel restrictions on journalists, particularly from Kashmir, have deprived them of their right to mobility. Their freedom to write and report on crucial issues is restricted and they are penalised for reporting on human rights violations in the Valley.

“Such restrictions and assaults endanger the right of journalists to practice their profession.

“The online violence against women journalists and the impunity that denies them justice, the toxic work environment in many newsrooms, sexual harassment in workplaces and the prevailing precarity of journalists in India, rendered unorganised due to contractualisation, impinges on the human rights of women media professionals, including the fundamental right to livelihood. Women journalists continue to face the challenge of access to employment and disparity in wages, while leadership positions in the media are still denied to them.

“Bihar has been the site of historic struggles for social justice, in which women, especially from marginalised communities, have played an active part, as well as for media freedom, as was evident from the successful protests against the 1982 Bihar Press Bill. It is therefore all the more disappointing that only a negligible number of women are employed in the media in Bihar even today.

“Exclusions due to patriarchy, caste, class, tribe, religion, disability and other such factors are wholly undemocratic and intolerable in the 21st Century.

“Openly hate-mongering reportage by partisan media has exacerbated the situation, plunging the country into a vortex of violence, uncertainty and chaos.

“Today, voices of dissent continue to be throttled, and people’s movements criminalised. The marginalised sections of society are displaced and their natural resources destroyed, rendering them more powerless than ever before.”

The entire focus of the NWMI’s 17th national meet was “Media, Gender and Social Justice: Towards an Equitable Society”. Over a hundred media women, representing over 20 states – from Kashmir to Kerala, Nagaland and Assam to Orissa and Maharashtra – and working in multiple languages, gathered in Patna in January 2023 to discuss issues concerning freedom of expression, challenges and opportunities for local and regional media, marginalisation and exclusion in the media on the basis of gender, caste, disability, etc, and online abuse and digital security.

A special session on “Experiments with social justice and the Bihar model” dwelt on the historical and current patterns of governance in a state categorised as “backward”, with special attention to the rationale for and impact of policies and initiatives such as liquor prohibition, reservations and other facilities for women, the ongoing caste census, and so on.

The national meet, held in the Aryabhatta Knowledge University, was an opportunity for the network to strengthen solidarity and reaffirm our responsibility and commitment to uphold media freedom and media workers’ rights, as well as to hold the powers that be to account.

The resolution may be read here: https://nwmindia.org/statements/nwmi-patna-declaration/

Related:

India, with seven journalists jailed, draws criticism over its curtailment of media freedoms

Kashmir: Journalist Aasif Sultan jailed under PSA, after getting bail 

Does news of assaults on journalists not reach any minister’s reading list?

Remember journalists Siddique Kappan, Aasif Sultan, Kishorechandra Wangkhem?

The post Stand up for media freedom & ethical journalism: NWMI appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Censorship has been in the news again following Rwanda passing a new law. Shutterstock

Political cartoons are powerful spaces in which negotiations of power and resistance are expressed. They provide insights into power relations, key social issues and events. By mocking or ridiculing the excesses and failings of elites, cartoonists can hold leaders accountable.
While the intent – and reception – of cartoons can mobilise critiques of leaders and excesses of power, they can also be divisive and regressive. This is particularly true when cartoons fail to consider local history, cultural norms, and cultural or religious difference. Recent years have witnessed many of these controversies. These include the publication of editorial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten which eventually led to protests around the world, including violent demonstrations and riots in some Muslim countries. Or the reaction by women’s groups to South African cartoonist Zapiro’s depictions of former South African President Jacob Zuma “preparing to rape” the “Lady of Justice”. They said it was insensitive in a country where rape is a daily occurrence.

Rwanda has huge sensitivities when it comes to political cartoons. Prior to the 1994 genocide, when an estimated 800,000 Rwandans were killed in the space of 100 days, a cartoon strip in the Kangura newspaper was seen as a propaganda tool to promote division and hostility. This has meant that in recent years, cartoonists remain cautious of crossing official and unofficial lines when covering political issues.

While all journalists try to balance tensions between free speech and causing division, this is particularly fraught for cartoonists. Their work can challenge us to question ourselves, provoke empathy for others and often relies on an emotional reaction – one not always intended to elicit laughter – to convey their argument.
 

Role of political cartoons

Political and editorial cartoons are a key indicator of the democratic health of a country. They are the “canary in the coal mine”, providing a public display of opposition and dissent. They use a unique art to raise questions and speak a truth to power in ways denied to others. In this role, political cartoonists highlight abuses and excesses of power, and hold governments and leaders accountable.

Witness, for instance, South African cartoonist Zapiro’s many depictions of former President Zuma with a shower faucet attached to his head. These were drawn in the aftermath of Zuma’s rape acquittal. During his court case, Zuma admitted he showered after having unprotected sex as a means to prevent the spread of HIV. Long after the trial, the cartoon continued to act as constant reminder of the rape case, a motif the cartoonist used to question the legitimacy of Zuma’s leadership.

Elsewhere, we see heads of state being ridiculed by being compared to animals: US President George W Bush as an ape, ex-British Prime Minister Tony Blair as a poodle, former Zimbabwean elites as snakes. All these images raised questions about the credibility of powerful office-holders.
 

Control

Restricting and intimidating political cartoonists is often a key part of broader efforts to curtail press freedoms and free speech.

As elites seek to maintain control, political cartoonists face threats and intimidation for their work. In recent years, we have seen court cases against cartoonists all over the world, including in Malaysia, South Africa, Turkey, and Serbia. In the US contracts have been terminated amid suspicions of political influence.

In the case of Rwanda, the media landscape is marked by restrictions on press freedoms and various forms of censorship. It is classified by the Freedom in the World report as “not free”, alongside countries including Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, and Venezuela. Reporters without Borders ranks Rwanda as 156th in the world for Press Freedoms, comparable with the Democratic Republic of Congo.

But the country’s context is important, the memory of the 1994 genocide remains strong and is ingrained in the national psyche.

Prior to and during the genocide, sections of the print and broadcast media were pivotal in promoting and deepening ethnic division and hostility. Central to such divisive tactics was the presentation of sections of the population as sub-human – as cockroaches – who needed to be exterminated.

It is therefore understandable that, as the country rebuilds, sensitivities remain around representation of individuals or groups which humiliate or degrade them.
 

Fine line

The critical voice of the political cartoonist can provide a vital safety valve for a society. They can give expression to frustrations, grievances and opposition. But cartoonists need to remain sensitive to local political and social histories.

It’s a fine line between balancing the need to protect free speech and these concerns. Political cartoonists need to continue to speak truth to power, but in so doing must ensure they do not cause division and hostility which may threaten the most fundamental of rights – the right to life.

Daniel Hammett, Lecturer in Development and Political Geography, University of Sheffield
 

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Cartoonists can be an important voice of dissent: but they can also be divisive appeared first on SabrangIndia.