Supreme Court PIL Seeks National Protocol to Protect Journalists During Protests

PIL in SC seeks safeguards for journalists covering protests

New Delhi, July 25

The writ petition, filed by advocate Narendra Kumar Goswami in his personal capacity, has sought directions for the protection of journalists, camerapersons and media workers from targeted mob violence, sexualised abuse, intimidation and obstruction while reporting from protest sites, along with preservation of electronic evidence relating to the incidents.

The plea has also sought directions for preservation of CCTV footage, police videography, drone and body-camera recordings, wireless and control-room records, deployment records, medical records of victims, and original video files voluntarily supplied by journalists or media organisations.

It has further prayed for a time-bound probe by officers unconnected with the crowd-control deployment, protection of victims and witnesses, and filing of a status report identifying complaints received, FIRs registered, evidence preserved and investigative steps taken.

Referring to the incidents reported between July 18 and July 23 during the student protests at and around Jantar Mantar, the plea alleged that several journalists were targeted by sections of the gathering while discharging their professional duties.

The petition referred to reports of alleged assaults on Times Now reporter Dev Kotak, attacks on other journalists and camerapersons, incidents of intimidation, and allegations of sexualised abuse and death threats directed at a woman reporter.

It clarified that these reports were not being presented as facts but to underline the need for preservation of evidence and an independent investigation.

"The Constitution protects criticism of the media, boycott of a channel, peaceful slogans and robust public disagreement. It does not protect assault, criminal intimidation, gendered abuse, snatching, wrongful restraint, rioting or destruction of recording equipment," the plea stated.

"The journalist is not the alter ego of a corporate employer. Even serious public distrust of mainstream television cannot become a private licence to inflict punishment upon the person holding a microphone," it added.

The petition contended that the relief sought was "carefully limited" to preservation of evidence, victim protection and neutral accountability, and did not seek adjudication on competing narratives surrounding the protests.

It also disclosed that related petitions concerning allegations of excessive police force against student protesters are scheduled to be listed before the Supreme Court on July 27, while proceedings concerning the Delhi incidents are pending before the Delhi High Court.

The petitioner has sought tagging of the present PIL with the connected matters or its treatment as a companion proceeding.

The plea relied upon several Supreme Court judgments to contend that freedom of expression cannot be surrendered to threats of violence and that the government has a constitutional obligation to protect lawful expression and preserve evidence.

It added that a representation seeking preservation of evidence, a neutral investigation and a national media-safety protocol had already been submitted to the authorities on July 24, but no comprehensive action had been communicated, necessitating the filing of the present PIL.

"The petition has therefore been framed not as a political counter-narrative but as a constitutional plea for neutral accountability: protect peaceful protest; protect journalists; protect police personnel acting lawfully; prosecute individual violence; investigate unlawful force; and preserve the evidence required to distinguish one from the other," the plea said.

— IANS