- Make no mistake, the Indian Constitution framed by our forefathers not only exercised tremendous foresight when they sat together to construct the basic building block for a nascent country but also showed enough wisdom in phrasing certain causes without compromising the basic tenet of rights. The rights guaranteed in the Constitution have been the guiding light for every citizen irrespective of caste, creed, or class. The three arms of the Constitution, viz. the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary are clearly demarcated without any ambiguities. However, as experienced over the years, the different arms of the Constitution do attempt to encroach upon other territories, leading to charges of activism being bandied about.
PC: Telegraph India
- Further, it is observed that many times courts exercise their power arbitrarily while addressing matters related to free speech. Of course, the SC bench says the right things. Recently, a SC bench hammered home the importance of media freedom during a hearing. It reminded courts of the need to be tolerant of free speech and not cry contempt on the slightest pretext. Note that in Jan this year, 1.45L contempt cases were pending in SC and high courts. Some of them would be against media organizations and independent journalists. And a subset of those could well be arbitrary, unfair, or excessive.
PC: LawBeat
- The 2019 Meghalaya HC order against two women journalists, holding them guilty of contempt for reporting on the perks provided to retired judges & families drew global attention. Later, SC had stayed the order. The recent SC hearing was about a Delhi HC order against Wikipedia that deemed criticism to be interference in court proceedings. But as the SC bench pointed out, judges must take criticism in their stride. As reported, during the hearing, the bench once again emphasized the dangers of sweeping gag orders. In 2022, SC refused to bar a journalist from posting on X while on bail, saying gag orders have a chilling effect on the freedom of speech.
PC: SRM Institute of Science and Technology
- By now, this should be a well-settled point. Sadly, for speech in India, it isn’t. SC has questioned the legality and validity of Delhi HC’s directions against Wikipedia. By pursuing this enquiry further, it could build safeguards against the arbitrary exercise of contempt powers. Perhaps, it’s time for a larger Constitution bench to look into this question and answer it once and for all. As the SC bench said recently, the question here is about the free speech rights of media. By extension, it’s about strengthening the fourth pillar of Indian democracy, the media. Let’s hope that the three pillars of the Constitution will endeavour to ensure this.
