Tag: MediaOne

  • SC quashes Centre’s ban on news channel MediaOne, says independent press necessary

    Express News Service

    NEW DELHI: India’s top court on Wednesday quashed the Centre’s denial of security clearance to Malayalam news channel MediaOne, and ruled that criticism of a government cannot be grounds to revoke the license of a media or television channel.

    The Supreme Court was hearing the plea of the news channel against the Kerala High Court’s order which had upheld the Centre’s decision to ban its telecast on security grounds.

    A bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud pulled up the Ministry of Home Affairs for invoking national security, stating, “State is using plea of national security to deny rights of citizens. This is incompatible with rule of law. National security claims can’t be made out of thin air.”  

    The court also said that non-disclosure of reasons for the denial of security clearance by MHA and disclosure only to the court in a “sealed cover” violated the principles of natural justice and the right to fair proceedings, leaving the company “in the dark to fight out.”

    Laying down comprehensive guidelines for courts adopting ‘sealed cover’ procedure during hearing matters relating to national security, the bench said, “Sealed cover procedure cannot be introduced to cover harms that cannot be remedied by public immunity proceedings… Principles of natural justice may be excluded when the interests of national security outweigh. But a blanket immunity from disclosure cannot be granted… Sealed cover procedure infringes the principles of natural justice and open justice.” 

    The bench further ruled that MHA’s reliance on the channel’s report on the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, the National Register of Citizens (NRC), criticism of the judiciary and State for terming the channel as “anti-establishment” was not justified.

    “All investigation reports cannot be termed secret as these affect the rights and liberty of the citizens,” the bench said. 

    The court also said that the press has a duty to speak truth to power and inform citizens about hard facts.

    “The critical views of the channel against the govt policies cannot be termed as anti-establishment. This view presumes that the press should always support the govt. An independent press is necessary for a robust democracy. The criticism of the policies of the govt cannot be stretched to mean any of the grounds under Article 19(2) which can restrict free speech,” the court said. 

    What the top court said:

    Kerala HC’s order upholding Centre’s decision to ban ‘MediaOne’ telecast on security grounds.
    An independent press is necessary for a robust democracy.
    Critical views of MediaOne channel against govt policies can’t be termed anti-establishment.
    National security claims cannot be made out of thin air, there must be material facts backing it.

    NEW DELHI: India’s top court on Wednesday quashed the Centre’s denial of security clearance to Malayalam news channel MediaOne, and ruled that criticism of a government cannot be grounds to revoke the license of a media or television channel.

    The Supreme Court was hearing the plea of the news channel against the Kerala High Court’s order which had upheld the Centre’s decision to ban its telecast on security grounds.

    A bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud pulled up the Ministry of Home Affairs for invoking national security, stating, “State is using plea of national security to deny rights of citizens. This is incompatible with rule of law. National security claims can’t be made out of thin air.”  googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });

    The court also said that non-disclosure of reasons for the denial of security clearance by MHA and disclosure only to the court in a “sealed cover” violated the principles of natural justice and the right to fair proceedings, leaving the company “in the dark to fight out.”

    Laying down comprehensive guidelines for courts adopting ‘sealed cover’ procedure during hearing matters relating to national security, the bench said, “Sealed cover procedure cannot be introduced to cover harms that cannot be remedied by public immunity proceedings… Principles of natural justice may be excluded when the interests of national security outweigh. But a blanket immunity from disclosure cannot be granted… Sealed cover procedure infringes the principles of natural justice and open justice.” 

    The bench further ruled that MHA’s reliance on the channel’s report on the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, the National Register of Citizens (NRC), criticism of the judiciary and State for terming the channel as “anti-establishment” was not justified.

    “All investigation reports cannot be termed secret as these affect the rights and liberty of the citizens,” the bench said. 

    The court also said that the press has a duty to speak truth to power and inform citizens about hard facts.

    “The critical views of the channel against the govt policies cannot be termed as anti-establishment. This view presumes that the press should always support the govt. An independent press is necessary for a robust democracy. The criticism of the policies of the govt cannot be stretched to mean any of the grounds under Article 19(2) which can restrict free speech,” the court said. 

    What the top court said:

    Kerala HC’s order upholding Centre’s decision to ban ‘MediaOne’ telecast on security grounds.
    An independent press is necessary for a robust democracy.
    Critical views of MediaOne channel against govt policies can’t be termed anti-establishment.
    National security claims cannot be made out of thin air, there must be material facts backing it.

  • SC seeks Centre’s reply on plea of Kerala journalists’ body against TV channel ban

    By PTI

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday sought a response from the Centre on a plea by the Kerala Union of Working Journalists challenging a Kerala High Court order upholding a ban on the telecast of a Malayalam news channel.

    A bench of justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant issued notice and tagged it along with the plea filed by the channel itself, while directing that a copy be served to the central agency.

    On March 15, the top court had stayed till further orders the January 31 directive of the Centre revoking the licence of Malayalam news channel ‘MediaOne’ and banning its telecast on security grounds.

    It had said the news and current affairs channel will continue its operations as it was doing prior to the ban.

    “We are of the view that the case of grant of interim relief has been made out. We order and direct that order dated January 31, 2022 of the Union government revoking the security clearance of Madhyamam Broadcasting Ltd stands stayed pending further orders”, the top court had ordered.

    “The petitioners (Madhyamam Broadcasting Ltd and Pramod Raman editor of the channel and others) shall be permitted to continue operating the news and current affairs channel ‘MediaOne’ on the same basis as it was operating prior to the revocation of clearances,” it had said.

    The top court had passed the order after perusing the files placed before it by the Centre on the basis of which security clearance was revoked and the Kerala High Court had passed the order upholding the ban on the telecast.

    It had left the question open on whether the content of files on the basis of which the ban order was passed be given to the channel to enable it to defend itself.

    On March 10, the top court had sought the Centre’s response to the channel’s plea against the Kerala High Court order upholding the Centre’s decision to ban its telecast on security grounds.

    It had asked the Centre to place on record the file which was relied on by the high court.

    The Kerala High Court had upheld the Centre’s decision to bar the telecast of the Malayalam news channel and dismissed the plea of Madhyamam Broadcasting Ltd — which operates MediaOne — challenging the central government’s January 31 decision.

    The high court had said that the decision of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to deny security clearance was based on intelligence inputs received from various agencies.

    The channel had contended that MHA clearance was only required at the time for fresh permission/licence and not at the time of renewal.

    It had also contended that according to the uplinking and downlinking guidelines, security clearance was only required at the time of application for fresh permission and not at the time of renewal of licence.