Editors Guild Condemns I&B Ministry’s Notices to Three Channels Over Memon’s Hanging
NB: It is a rich irony that this government has accused news channels for disrespecting the Supreme Court. One of the first steps the Modi government took with regard to the justice system was to sabotage the elevation of the respected lawyer Gopal Subramaniam to the Supreme Court in June 2014, with the help of a slander campaign.
Since then it has repeatedly shown its contempt for the rule of law:
Since then it has repeatedly shown its contempt for the rule of law:
Prajapati encounter case: Gujarat Police inspector Ashish Pandya reinstated in service
Gujarat reinstates another suspended cop after securing bail in Prajapati encounter case
Ishrat Encounter Cop Reinstated // Muzzafarnagar Riot accused becomes Union minister
Gujarat reinstates another suspended cop after securing bail in Prajapati encounter case
Ishrat Encounter Cop Reinstated // Muzzafarnagar Riot accused becomes Union minister
An emergency without the declaration is being implemented, and it is up to the citizens who value democracy to defend the Indian constitution. All the ideologues with big expectations of this government should examine their consciences and speak out. It will be their turn next. The story behind the Vyapam scam should be enough to open their eyes: DS
************
The First Sign a Government is Losing Its Nerve: Shekhar Gupta
************
The First Sign a Government is Losing Its Nerve: Shekhar Gupta
************
On August 8, the Editors Guild of India condemned the
Information and Broadcasting Ministry’s issuing show-cause notices to three TV
news channels for their coverage related to Yakub Memon’s hanging, terming the
action as “shocking” and called for an immediate withdrawal of the notices.
The Guild’s President N. Ravi said in a statement that “it
is shocking that the Information and Broadcasting Ministry should have issued
notices to ABP News, NDTV and Aaj Tak for their coverage of the Yakub Memon
issue under the cable TV regulations.” “Those regulations were never meant to be used to stop the
free and vigorous discussion of matters of public interest, however
disagreeable the content might be to the government.”
He added that Yakub Memon’s case before the Supreme
Court and the President and the subsequent execution were “matters of
widespread public interest with sharply polarised viewpoints.” “The discussion of the issues was obviously in the nature of
political speech that should be allowed free expression without curbs,” the
statement said, and that “viewpoints unacceptable to the government ought
not to be penalised on the specious plea that they would incite violence or
spread hatred.”
The guild called upon the Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting to withdraw the notices. It also said that “it is time
for a re-examination of the broadcasting regulations that on the face of it
look over-broad and leave room for misuse in violation of the right to Freedom
of Expression under Article 19 1(a) of the Constitution.”
http://thewire.in/2015/08/09/editors-guild-condemns-ib-ministrys-notices-to-three-channels-over-memons-hanging-8125/
see also
It is no secret that the unstated reason for the
government’s opposition was that Mr. Subramanium was the amicus curiae in the
Sohrabuddin encounter case (Sohrabuddin Sheikh was prosecuted by the same CBI)
and in other cases, where senior figures of the current government are
allegedly complicit... In a country where the Judiciary is in charge
of its own appointments, something more substantial than an IB report based on
innuendo and hearsay is required before impugning the integrity of the
candidate and the appointment process.
Sanjiv
Chaturvedi: zero tolerance for honesty in the Narendra Modi government
"The masterminds of the 26/11 attacks are treated
like heroes in Pakistan. We are not there yet, but if hidden hands nudge
the judicial system to free murderers of the saffron variety, we will be
soon"
The psychology
of hate: How we deny human beings their humanity
Travesty of justice - Bombay High court refuses bail to artists of Kabir Kala Manch in jail for two years without trial
Travesty of justice - Bombay High court refuses bail to artists of Kabir Kala Manch in jail for two years without trial
The Broken Middle (on the 30th anniversary of 1984)
[Interview]
The meaning very clearly was, don’t get us favourable orders: Rohini
Salian
Retired Gujarat DIG Vanzara Demands Promotions for Encounter-Accused Cops (and threatens 'unknown consequences' in case his demands are refused).
DG Vanzara's letter - Times of India (2013)
Sumana Ramanan - Film-maker releases a dozen clips of controversial Modi speeches made just after Gujarat riots (2014)
Retired Gujarat DIG Vanzara Demands Promotions for Encounter-Accused Cops (and threatens 'unknown consequences' in case his demands are refused).
DG Vanzara's letter - Times of India (2013)
Sumana Ramanan - Film-maker releases a dozen clips of controversial Modi speeches made just after Gujarat riots (2014)
Prajapati encounter case:
Gujarat Police inspector Ashish Pandya reinstated in service
Gujarat reinstates another suspended cop after securing bail in Prajapati encounter case
DG Vanzara's letter - Times of India (2013)
Gujarat reinstates another suspended cop after securing bail in Prajapati encounter case
DG Vanzara's letter - Times of India (2013)
Terrifying implications of the Staines judgement
Shekhar Gupta - National Interest: Secularism is dead!
Shekhar Gupta - National Interest: Secularism is dead!
More on justice in India, the death penalty, etc.
NB: I am adding a citation from an
important book on Nazism written in the 1930's, Behemoth, The Structure and Practice
of National Socialism; New
York, republished
(The counter revolution) ‘…tried many
forms and devices, but soon learned that it could come to power only with the
help of the state machine and never against it… the Kapp Putsch of 1920 and the
Hitler Pustch of 1923 had proved this.. In the centre of the counter revolution
stood the judiciary.
Unlike administrative acts, which rest on considerations of convenience and
expediency, judicial decisions rest on law, that is on right and wrong, and
they always enjoy the limelight of publicity. Law is perhaps the most pernicious of
all weapons in political struggles, precisely because of the halo that surrounds the concepts
of right and justice… ‘Right’, Hocking has said, ‘is psychologically a claim
whose infringement is met with a resentment deeper than the injury would
satisfy, a resentment that may amount to passion for which men will risk life
and property as they would never do for an expediency’. When it becomes
‘political’, justice breeds hatred and despair among those it singles out for
attack. Those whom it favours, on the other hand, develop a profound contempt
for the very value of justice, they know that it can be purchased by the
powerful. As a device for strengthening one political group at the expense of
others, for eliminating enemies and assisting political allies, law then
threatens the fundamental convictions upon which the tradition of our
civilization rests…
