Need Of Balance Between Media Trial And Rights Of Citizen
Author: LawSphereX
Category: General Law
Published:
Updated:
NEED OF BALANCE BETWEEN MEDIA TRIAL AND
RIGHTS OF CITIZEN
Dr. Sarika Karanjule, Asst. Professor, Sinhgad Law College, Pune Miss. Anjali Narayan Nannaware, LL.B., Sinhgad Law College, Pune
ABSTRACT
This case study explores the impact of media trials on society and the legal system. Media trials are high-profile legal cases that receive extensive media attention, which often influences public discussions about justice and fairness. The study examines how media narratives shape public perception, drive social movements, and affect the credibility of judicial rulings. It also addresses the media's dual function as a means of promoting transparency and a potential source of bias, highlighting the difficulties faced by the judiciary in remaining impartial under public scrutiny. Key findings reveal that media trials can significantly affect public trust in the judicial system; positive media coverage can boost confidence, while negative portrayal can breed skepticism.
Furthermore, public opinion pressure can influence judicial decisions, raising concerns about the independence of the judiciary and the integrity of legal processes. In conclusion, the research emphasizes the importance of a balanced strategy for media interaction in judicial system. It calls for enhancing judicial education on media relations, encouraging media literacy among the public, and exploring policy reforms to protect the integrity of the judiciary while facilitating essential public involvement. This case study adds to the ongoing conversation about the relationship between media, law, and society, underlining the significant effects of media trials in today's legal environment.
INTRODUCTION:
The media serves as a platform that amplifies the voices of the many, offering a space for the average person to be heard. The media is often regarded as the fourth estate and a fundamental pillar of our democratic society, alongside the executive, legislature, and judiciary. It carries a significant responsibility in fostering the relationship between the government and the public. In recent years, there has been an increased interaction between the media and ordinary citizens. The media is seen as a watchdog of society. "Trial by media" is a term that gained popularity in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, referring to how television and newspaper coverage can influence public perception of an individual's guilt or innocence, even before or after a court verdict.
The term "media trials" describes the phenomenon where news outlets, particularly television channels and newspapers, extensively cover a high-profile legal case, often taking on the roles of investigator, prosecutor, and judge. It refers to how coverage from television and newspapers can influence a person's reputation by shaping public opinion about their guilt or innocence, either before or after a legal verdict is passed.
OBJECTIVE:
The objective of this research paper are as follows:
1. To investigate the role of media trials in a democratic country.
2. To explore the effects of media trials on society.
3. To attempt to find a balance between two opposing rights: the right to privacy and the right
to a fair trial for the accused, as well as the right to freedom of the press.
4. To conduct a critical analysis of the practice of media trials
RESEARCH PROBLEM:
In a democracy, the freedom of the press is crucial, but it should not infringe on an individual’s rights. Media trials pose a significant threat to the right to a fair trial for those accused of crimes. This recent trend is concerning as it disrupts legal proceedings and fails to recognize the critical
distinction between an "accused" person and a "convict." Globally, this phenomenon showcases the media's substantial influence, which can adversely affect public perception. Media trials represent an improper interference in the justice system and the rights of the accused. It is essential to address this issue to preserve social order and ensure that information sharing does not mislead the public.
HYPOTHESIS:
1. Media trials disrupt the principle of separation of powers by interfering in the justice system.
2. It's necessary to reform the existing regulatory framework to minimize media involvement
in criminal trials.
3. There is need to strike a balance between the conflicting rights: the accused's right to privacy
and a fair trial versus the media's right to freedom of speech and expression.
4. There is need to work on the recommendation made in 200th law commission report.
METHODOLOGY:
The method used in the present research is doctrinal method. The information is gathered from different primary as well as secondary sources, including books, journals, articles, online materials, research papers, laws and bare acts. The researcher will also look at various statutory laws and the law commission report of India regarding the topic to conclude this study.
CONSTITUIONALITY OF MEDIA TRIAL:
1. PRESS FREEDOM VS FAIR TRIAL:
Article 19(1)(a) guarantees freedom of speech and expression to all the citizens and it also cover the freedom of the press. When the issue was discussed in the constituent assembly that whether the freedom of speech and expression includes press freedom, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar explained that: “The press is another alternative means of expressing an individual or a citizen. The press has no special right in any law which are not to be given to or which are not to be exercised by the citizen in his individual capacity. The editor of a press or the manager are all citizens therefore
they have right of expression and in my judgment, no special mention is necessary of the freedom of press at all”. 1 However, this right is not an absolute right and certain restriction are also imposed on the exercise of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(2) of the Constitution. In the other hand everyone has a right to “Fair trial” which involves opportunities of showing her innocence. Denying such right in a criminal case entail denying the right to a fair trial. Protection for the convict person is provided by Article 21 of Constitution of India. Violation of this may lead to be punished under the Contempt of Court Act 1971 and under Article 129 and 215 of the Constitution of India. When the news gets more sensationalised by the media becomes grave threat to the right to a fair trial guaranteed under constitution of India and presumption of innocence.
The increasing influence of the media becomes detrimental to the impartial decision-making process of the judiciary. In a conflict between fair and freedom of speech, fair trial has to necessarily prevail because any compromise of fair trial for an accused will cause immense harm and defeat justice delivery system. Internationally right to a fair trial is recognised as a fundamental right and everyone should respect it. In Zahira Habibullah Shaikh and Ors. v/s The State of Gujarat and Ors, 2006, The Supreme Court of India stated that "everyone has an innate right to be treated fairly in a criminal prosecution. “Deny to fair trial means the injustice to both the accused and victim as well as to society.
2 In State of Maharashtra v/s Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi,3the Supreme Court observed: “The parallel trial conducted by press; electronic media is totally opposite to the procedure established by law. This will lead to miscarriage of justice to the accused violating the right to privacy. A judge has to protect himself against any such pressure and is to be strictly follow the rules of law. If a person is guilty of an offence, punishment should be given as per the provision 1Nanda, S. K. (2021). Media Law (2nd ed. ). Central Law Publication 2 Samridhi. Right to a fair trial under indian laws. https://www. legalserviceindia. com/legal/article-10562-rightto-a-fair-trial-under-indian-laws. html
3 (1997)8 S.C.C.386
of statutory laws.”4
2. MEDIA TRIAL AND CONTEMPT OF COURT:
The Contempt of Court Act, 1971 states that once a case is before the court and undergoing pre-trial motions, no person or publication is permitted to present their own interpretations of the case's facts. Publishing any such information that disrupts or interferes with court proceedings, potentially harming the trial, is prohibited. Specifically, Section 2(c)(iii) of the Act clarifies that newspapers cannot act as investigators or suggest whether the accused is guilty or innocent while legal proceedings are ongoing. The prohibition against 'trial by media' exists for several reasons: a) It may influence potential witnesses. b) It could pressure parties to withdraw from litigation. c) It may create public bias, damaging overall confidence in the justice system. d) It might deter other potential litigants from seeking legal recourse.
It is essential to recognize the court's responsibility to uphold the rights of the accused, particularly the right to a fair trial, ensuring that every individual has an unobstructed opportunity for justice. Contempt is deemed applicable only when a criminal or civil case is 'pending,' which refers to situations such as when a charge sheet or warrant is filed or issued against the accused. Coverage related to the accused may include previous convictions or character assessments. However, under the current provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, these publications are granted immunity despite their potential threat to a fair trial. Legislative action is necessary to redefine 'pending' and broaden the Act’s scope. There are gaps that need addressing to curb aggressive media trials and prevent the press from influencing public opinion for increased viewership. 5
4 Jha, N. (2015, November13). Constitutionality of media trials in india: A detailed analysis.
https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/media-trials-india/
5 Contempt of Court Act,1971. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/1514/1/197170.pdf
3. PRESS COUNCIL NORMS ON MEDIA TRIAL:
In the year 2019, the Press Council of India, in order to build a code of conduct for the press and media, in accordance with its high professional standard came out with ‘Norms of Journalist Conduct’. The first part of this code deals with ‘Trial by Media’ and ‘Guidelines on sting operations’. Following is some of these norms on media trial: • An accused is entitled to be presumed innocent until proven guilty by the court. • The media report should not induce the general public to believe in the complicity of the person indicted as such kind of action brings undue pressure on the course of fair investigation by the police. • Victim, witnesses, suspects and accused should not be given excessive publicity as it will amount to invasion of their privacy rights.
• The media is not expected to conduct its own parallel trial of foretell the decision putting undue pressure on the judge, the jury or the witnesses or prejudices a party to the proceedings. 6
4. 200TH LAW COMMISION REPORT ON MEDIA TRIAL:
In this 200th repot of Law Commission” Trial by Media: Free Speech Vs. Fair Trial under Criminal Procedure (Amendments to the Contempt of Court Act, 1971)” under the Chairmanship of Justice M. Jagannatha Rao in August, 2006, made the following recommendations: • To prevent the release of any information that could harm the reputation of the accused, restrictions will begin from the moment of arrest. • The initiation of a criminal case should be recognized from the time of the accused's arrest, rather than when the chargesheet is filed, with the intention of avoiding any bias against the case.
6 Nanda, S. K. (2021). Media Law (2nd ed.). Central Law Publications.
To mitigate the harmful impacts of sensationalized media reports on the justice system. • The high court has the authority to order the delay of broadcasts or publications in criminal cases and to stop the media from engaging in such reports. • It has suggested an amendment to section 3(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act,1971 • The Seventeenth Law Commission also recommended that the person in the field of journalism need to be trained about law relating to freedom of speech in Art. 19(1)(a) and the restrictions given under Art. 19(2) of the Constitution of India, human rights, law of defamation and contempt. Also suggested that these subjects must be included in the syllabus for journalism and special diploma or degree courses on journalism.7
MEDIA TRIAL AND ITS IMPACT ON SOCIETY:
Influencing Public Perception: Media reporting can present cases in manners that affect how the public views the parties involved and the judicial system. The choice of language, tone, and emphasis by the media can craft narratives that connect with audiences, frequently resulting in divided opinions. For example, a situation may be depicted as a fight for justice or as an illustration of systemic breakdown, depending on how the media presents it. • Public Confidence in the Judiciary: The representation of court processes in the media can significantly influence public trust in the justice system. Favourable media reports can boost trust in judicial results, whereas unfavourable depictions might encourage doubt and mistrust. When the public believes that media narratives are unfairly swaying a trial, it can raise wider worries about the legitimacy of the judicial system.
• Social Movements and Advocacy: High-profile media trials can act as triggers for social movements, rallying public opinion on matters like gender violence, racial injustice, and holding influential individuals accountable. The media's influence in promoting these movements can result in considerable societal transformations, including alterations in public policy and legal modifications. 7Jagannadha, J. M. (2006). Trial by media: Free speech and fair trial under criminal procedure code,1973. Law commission of india. https://lawcommissionofindia. nic. in/report_seventeenth/
ROLE OF JUDICIARY ON MEDIA TRIAL:
1. K.M Nanavati V/S State of Maharashtra [1962 AIR 605]8
No rights guaranteed to the citizens of India, including the fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Constitution, are absolute. The press or media, often referred to as the fourth pillar of democracy, derives its rights from the right to freedom of speech and expression as articulated in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution; however, these rights are also subject to reasonable restrictions. Over the years, various provisions and judicial precedents have shaped these limitations. Additionally, guidelines have been established to ensure that the conduct of media channels and their anchors remains responsible, neutral, unbiased, and professional, in accordance with the Constitutional mandate. Nevertheless, the behaviour of television channels frequently falls short of these standards.
The Supreme Court, in this ruling, has underscored the necessity for media discussions regarding ongoing investigations and cases to remain within responsible boundaries. This is essential to guarantee that a comprehensive investigation and an unbiased trial can take place. According to the Court, when media coverage and trials exceed moral, ethical, and legal standards, particularly when they are broadcast solely for sensationalism and profit, such actions must be legally restricted. “It is the primary duty of every responsible journalist to give the correct and impartial information of the news received by the them and unbiased views on the news and to be published as news item. The news presented by the news channels must be true and comprehensive without any false expression. ”
2. R.G Kar Case [Dr. Sandip Ghosh V/S Union of India] 2024 SCC Online Cal 7734
In this present case, the former principal of R.G. Kar Medical College and his wife claimed that media outlets were disseminating false, fictitious, and malicious stories about the former principal's alleged involvement in the rape and murder of a doctor near R.G. Kar Hospital. The petitioners argued that these news reports and social media posts incited public outrage, leading to a mob surrounding their premises and damaging their reputation and social standing. They further argued that the character vilification of the former principal violated their right to privacy, as the media published reports without verifying their accuracy or authenticity. The 8 Arora, T. (2024, Apr 24). Don’t cross the line: Courts on media trials and erring conduct of anchors https://cjp.org.in/dont-cross-the-line-courts-on-media-trials-and-erring-conduct-of-anchors/
court stated that the broad claims of harm to the former principal's reputation did not justify limiting the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a), which also encompasses the right to broadcast. The court advised that if the petitioners had specific grievances against any media organizations, they could seek redress under the Press Council Act of 1978, and for claims regarding intermediaries' actions, they could approach the authority under the Ethics Code of 2021.9
3. Nilesh Navalakha V/S Union of India: (2021)
The prominent Public Interest Litigation case titled “Nilesh Navlakha v. Union of India” marked a significant milestone as it was the first instance in which a court delineated standards governing the reporting of legal proceedings by media outlets. The Court established several essential guidelines, which include the following key directives: • The privacy and dignity of the victim must be upheld at all times; • Sensitive information pertaining to the case should remain confidential; • Any confession or admission made before an investigator is prohibited from being published; • Interviews with individuals associated with the case are not permitted while the matter is still under judicial consideration.10
4. Romesh Thapar V/S State of Madras: AIR (1950) SC 124
In the case of Romesh Thapar vs. State of Madras, the court determined that the freedom of speech and the press is fundamental to all democratic institutions. Following this ruling, the enforcement and recognition of press freedom have significantly increased. In the case of Prabhu Dutt vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court affirmed that the right to access news and information regarding government activities is encompassed within the freedom of the press. Nevertheless, this right is not without limitations, as restrictions may be applied in the interest 9 (2024, August 22). Calcutta high court refuses to restrain media houses and intermediaries from publishing news in petition filed by former principal of r. g kar medical college. Scc Times. https://www. scconline.
com/blog/post/2024/08/22/calcutta-hc-refuses-to-restrain-media-housesintermediaries-from-publishing-news-in-petition-filed-by-ex-principal-r-g-kar-medical-college/
10 Mishra, R. (2024, Mar 14). Media trial: A conviction before the trial?
https://www.livelaw.in/lawschool/articles/media-trial-a-conviction-before-the-trial-252276
of the public. The concept of press freedom was further clarified in the case of Indian Express Newspaper vs. Union of India, which defined it as the absence of interference in the circulation and content of newspapers. Press freedom is regarded as essential to political and social dialogue. In accordance with constitutional principles, the court has appropriately upheld press freedom and has annulled administrative actions and legislation that infringe upon it.11
5. PUCL v/s State of Maharashtra: (2014)10 SCC 635
In this case of Public Union for Civil Liberties the supreme court directs Home Ministry to prepare a comprehensive manual on media briefing by police personnel. During the investigation and trial phases, every defendant has the right to the presumption of innocence. Media coverage that suggests the guilt of the person being investigated can significantly harm the individual's reputation and personal dignity. Biased reporting can lead to public doubt about whether the individual under investigation has committed the crime, even though the involvement of the accused has not been examined, and if a charge-sheet is filed, it must follow the procedures of criminal justice as prescribed by law. The Court remarked that the Ministry should frame a guideline on police media briefings.12
SUGGESTIONS:
Here are some suggestions that could help mitigate the risks of trial by media: Ø To curb prejudicial media publications that affect justice, amendments are needed in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The definition of “pendency of a criminal proceeding” should begin at the moment of “arrest.” This change was proposed by the 200th Law Commission Report but has yet to be acted upon it. Ø The Press Council of India (PCI), a statutory body aimed at enhancing and sustaining standards within print media, holds limited powers as per the Press Council of India Act of 1978. To empower the PCI to take effective actions, amendments to this Act are necessary. Additionally, the PCI should establish stringent guidelines regarding media
11 1950 AIR 124
12 Apoorva. (2023, Dec 31). Home ministry to prepare a comprehensive manual on media briefing by police personnel: Inside supreme court verdict. Scc Times. https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2023/09/28/supreme-court-directs-home-ministry-to-prepare-manual-onmedia-briefings-by-police/
trials. Ø The Press Council Act of 1978 currently only addresses print media, and it is essential to extend its coverage to include electronic media. Integrating broadcasting media into the Act would introduce an element of external regulation alongside the current selfregulation. Ø Media professionals ought to be educated about media laws and their associated restrictions, fostering an understanding of their professional boundaries from the outset. Ø While the 200th Law Commission's report provided recommendations to control media trials, the government has not yet acted on them. It is essential to create a separate law addressing media trials. Ø Judicial Guidelines for Media: The judiciary can take an active approach by establishing guidelines for media reporting on court cases.
These guidelines should focus on encouraging responsible journalism and cautioning against sensationalism that might impact current trials.
RESEARCH ANALYSIS:
After going through all the laws related to media trials, articles published, and various judgements of the court, researcher analyzed that the first hypothesis framed by the researcher was proved as after issuance of Supreme Court guidelines on media trial, media has continuously interrupted with the power of the judiciary by giving the verdict of the high-profile cases even before any verdict of the court of law. Recently the Kerala HC issued guidelines and said that media should draw the ‘Laxman Rekha’ on media coverage of ongoing criminal cases.
As per the second hypothesis the researcher is at the view that the existing regulatory framework is not sufficient to mitigate the problems related to involvement of media trial on high profile criminal cases as the Contempt of Court act, that the pendency of criminal proceeding should be from the movement of ‘Arrest’ that rather than ‘Filing of Chargesheet’. And also, the Press Council Act, only deals with the print media, as considering the todays extensive interference of the social media there is need to reform the current regulatory mechanism. The recommendation made by the seventeenth Law Commission should be considered by the
media that there should be a balance between the freedom of press and the right to privacy and fair trial of the victim as well as the accused by taking in mind the restriction imposed on freedom of speech of media.
CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, the research emphasizes the importance of a balanced strategy for media interaction in judicial system. It calls for enhancing judicial education on media relations, encouraging media literacy among the public, and exploring policy reforms to protect the integrity of the judiciary while facilitating essential public involvement. It also concluded that in current situation media trials was playing a role of “Kangaroo Court” which is not healthy for democracy.
REFERENCES:
1. Myneni.S.R. (2002). Professional ethics, accountancy for lawyers and bench- bar relation.
(1st ed.). Asian law house
2. Pandey.J.N. (2022). Constitutional law of India. (59th edition). Central law agency
3. Nanda, S. K. (2021). Media Law (2nd ed.). Central Law Publication.