New Delhi, Oct 15: The Supreme Court on Thursday sought responses from the Centre and others on a plea seeking framing of guidelines governing interaction of police and law-enforcement authorities with journalists during protests and crowd control operations.
The apex court was hearing a plea which claimed that several journalists, including women media professionals, were assaulted and treated badly by the police while covering the protests in Delhi against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
“We would like to lay down guidelines,” a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed after senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for the petitioner, said there has to be a national protocol on this.
The bench directed that no coercive action be taken against a woman journalist, against whom a case has been filed by a Delhi Police officer alleging casteist remarks and public humiliation against him during a protest near Jantar Mantar here.
Jaising argued that the woman journalist was molested by a police officer but no FIR has been lodged to date on her complaint.
The bench observed that allegations made in the complaint of the woman journalist were “very serious”.
It asked the police to examine the complaint and complete its inquiry on it.
Jaising urged the bench to direct that no more FIRs be registered against women journalists.
“Even in war zones in Israel and Palestine, journalists go there and nobody stops them. Here, they are stopping journalists from going to Jantar Mantar,” she said, adding that journalists have a right to report.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench, “The difficulty is that, in the present era of digital technology, anyone having a mobile is a journalist.”
“Our experience is that there are several people who say they are freelance journalists. What is going on is reel-making in the protests.
“The problem is we don’t know who is a reel-maker and who is an independent journalist,” the top law officer said.
Jaising argued that several women journalists, who were performing their duties, were allegedly pushed and assaulted, including by male police officers, during the protests.
She urged the apex court to constitute an independent committee to look into the complaints of women journalists.
The bench observed that the committee could predominantly or exclusively have women members like former retired judges or retired IPS officers and others.
Jaising, who said she could suggest names for the committee, told the bench that she would submit a list of complaints by women journalists in a sealed cover.
“Before this court, every voice is valuable and everyone will be heard irrespective of numbers,” the bench observed.
Jaising argued that police cannot investigate themselves and the complaints made by female journalists covering the protests have to be examined by an independent committee.
The bench issued notice on the plea seeking responses from the Centre and the Delhi Police.
One of the advocates told the apex court that the police have seized electronic devices of several journalists who were covering the protests.
Another advocate claimed that a large number of women protestors were treated badly by the police.
“Allow me to file my response,” Mehta said.
After the top court asked the police not to take any coercive action against the woman journalist, senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia, appearing for some other petitioners, urged the bench to also consider the case of a pregnant woman journalist, who, he said, was allegedly pushed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in the apex court premises during the October 12 march.
“A lady journalist was pushed by Rahul Gandhi in the Supreme Court precincts. She was three months pregnant and she was hospitalised,” Bhatia argued, adding that the apex court may take cognisance of this.
The bench asked him to file a petition in this regard, and said it would consider the issue.
The plea, which flagged the issue concerning journalists, has sought a declaration that arbitrary detention, forcible removal, intimidation, assault, dragging, manhandling, injury or other use of force against media professionals while engaged in bona fide news gathering or reporting violates Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(d) and 21 of the Constitution.
It also sought direction for preservation and disclosure of all records relating to incidents involving journalists from October 10 onwards, including production of CCTV footage, body-worn camera recordings and police videography.
The plea urged the apex court to “frame, or direct the framing of, binding guidelines governing interaction of police and other law-enforcement authorities with journalists and media professionals during protests, public assemblies, crowd-control operations and other events of public importance”.
It said the guidelines should contain specific safeguards concerning the dignity, bodily integrity and safety of women journalists, including protection against arbitrary physical handling, intimidation, detention and forcible removal while engaged in bona fide news gathering or reporting.
The national capital has witnessed several protests demanding the resignation of Kumar as CEC over alleged irregularities in the SIR process. (PTI)
