Editorial, "Trial By Media" in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 30 June 2015 issue, Vol. 11, Part 1, No. 12.

TRIAL BY MEDIA

is generally embarrassing, especially to the law enforcing and justice delivery authorities, if not altogether counterproductive.  Of course, it has its own pros and cons in that many a time it has caused/helped unraveling of several scams and treasons against the interests of the public in various countries. However, media is always discouraged by the justice delivery systems the world over and strictly warned not to overstep its limits once any court is ‘in seisin’ of any particular case, especially if it were to be a criminal proceedings. There is a strong feeling among the administrators and judiciary that "media should not seek to become a ‘second judiciary’ by holding public trials. Putting out virtual running commentaries on pending proceedings could affect their outcome".  On the other hand, there is a counter blast on behalf of the media that "sensational reporting will take place because sensational incidents keep happening …. The Supreme Court will not be able to stop it. Yes, reporting must be accurate. But to say it amounted to trial by media is only a pejorative expression. Neither the court nor anyone … provided parameters to define what constitutes trial by media. … If a Shylock kind of case happens today, does everyone keep silent?" Also a level playing field is sought between print media and broadcast media, with the latter going virtually unfettered. Most of the controversies in this regard, including even the use of provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, concentrate on the issue of scandalizing judiciary but deal quite infrequently on the point of causing obstruction to the course of justice. The good old tradition of keeping moderation and control while reporting matters sub judice seems to have been thrown to the winds with disastrous consequences to suspects and accused in criminal proceedings with a lot of prejudice caused to them in course and the stigma sticking in such course making it a virtual hell for the suspects/accused all through their life, even if they are to be eventually acquitted. The media in general seems to place the burden of proof on the suspects/accused though the golden thread of our criminal justice system is the presumption of innocence of the accused until proved guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. This discordance, to say the least, needs to be corrected, judicially first and statutorily next, at the earliest. §§§

Editorial, "Right to Privacy and Corruption Cases", in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 15 June 2015 issue, Vol. 11, Part 1, No. 11.

RIGHT TO PRIVACY & CORRUPTION CASES

are the hot topics of the day, with the sensational trapping of Revanth Reddy, MLA and Telugu Desam Party leader, in the so-called ‘Vote for Note’ scam by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, Telangana, and the statements by the Chief Minister K. Chandrasekhara Rao (KCR) and Home Minister of Telangana to implicate the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh too in that corruption case on the basis of a mysterious audio tape broadcast by the Telangana news channel, with some even alleging that KCR himself handed over that tape to ‘their home channel’. The matters turned hotter with the ‘accused’ Chandra Babu Naidu, and his colleagues, hitting back with the allegations of illegal wiretapping resorted to by KCR and the Telangana Home Minister against them in violation of all constitutional and governance principles. May be the illegality of tapping may not relieve CBN from the rigors of present law relating to admissibility of evidence but that would certainly incriminate KCR, and others involved, on other counts and this tit-for-tat tactic may perhaps compel these parties involved to come to some sort of a convenient, even if ignominious, compromise, or may be not. But what bothers us here is as to whether the right to privacy can be infringed for sting operations in connection with anti-corruption maneuvers. In PUCL v. Union of India (AIR 1997 SC 568), directly coming to confront the issue of telephone tapping, Justice Kuldip Singh had declared that “Telephone conversation is an important facet of a man's private life. Right to privacy would certainly include telephone-conversation in the privacy of one's home or office. Telephone-tapping would, thus, infract Article 21 of the Constitution of India unless it is permitted under the procedure established by law;” and proceeded to issue some guidelines for permissible tapping, the cardinal one being: “An order for telephone-tapping in terms of Section 5(2) of the [Telegraph] Act shall not be issued except by the Home Secretary, Government of India … and Home Secretaries of the State Governments……” And as Section 5(2) itself specifies the context of a public emergency or public safety as the essential prerequisite for any such tapping, that would certainly rule out any mere anti-corruption maneuver being a valid criterion for telephone tapping.  Further, a question as to whether the CM and Home Minister of Telangana are also liable for any contempt of court for divulging crucial evidence out of court also needs serious judicial consideration. §§§

Editorial, "India China Relations" in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 31 May 2015 issue: Vol. 11, Part 1, No. 10.

INDIA CHINA RELATIONS

were never more chummy and euphoric than in the 1950s when all the stalwart idealistic leaders of the emerging post-colonial Asia were alive and zealously pursuing the peace agenda of a new anti-imperialist,  non-aligned pro-people new world order they had in mind. But we know how the supercilious conduct of our leaders, especially the Nehru-Krishna Menon-Kaul axis, had spoilt the ecstatic Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai climate. The Henderson Brooks-Bhagat duo entrusted by the Indian Army to look into the causes for the humiliating debacle suffered by us seem to have put the blame squarely on the aggressive forward policy and the disgusting favoritism followed by our top political, military authorities of the day. Unfortunately, this HB/B Report has not been made public even after all these decades, though its text seems to be readily available to all foreigners to point fingers and heckle at our incompetent and corrupt top brass. Just to quote the starting lines of an excellent introduction to the same by the world famous political analyst Nevill Maxwell, whose historic eye-opener account, “India’s China War” is still banned in India – “WHEN the Army’s report into its debacle in the border war was completed in 1963 the Indian government had good reason to keep it ‘Top Secret’ and give only the vaguest, and largely misleading, indications of its contents. At that time the government’s effort, ultimately successful, to convince the political public that the Chinese, with a sudden ‘unprovoked aggression’, had caught India unawares in a sort of Himalayan Pearl Harbour was in its early stages, and the Report’s cool and detailed analysis, if made public, would have shown that to be self-exculpatory mendacity” – would suffice to highlight the real problem between the two countries. Needless to stress that without solving the border dispute with an amicable ‘give and take’ perspective and a cordial forget-the-colonial-past and look-to-the-bright-future-ahead spirit, no amount of friendly ‘selfies’ taken or vasudhaiva kutumbakam (world is one family) exhortations made by our new premier would do to meaningfully improve the relations between these two Asian giants, especially in the background of raging international state and religious fundamentalist terrorism, the dagger of which is being pointed at us through our daayaadi (kinsman) neighbor now in so close terms with the newly emerging superpower of the world – so aggressively expansionist now as at no time in recent history. §§§

Editorial, A FIGHTING AND FESTIVE DAY, in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 15 May 2015, Vol. 11, Part 1, No. 9 issue

A FIGHTING AND FESTIVE DAY

No words suffice to hail this historic day of working class struggles, full of sacrifices and ordeals, that gradually led to each and every human right we the masses in its posterity enjoy today in international and domestic law spheres. The heroic martyrs of Chicago – Engel, Fischer, Parsons, and Spies – who were hanged or rather ‘strangled to death slowly’ on the gallows, who fearlessly swung singing the Marseillaise, the then international revolutionary anthem, and Lingg who preceded them by suicide, can never be forgotten and indeed it did eventually happen as Spies was reported to have shouted in his last moments, “The time will come when our silence will be more powerful than the voices you strangle today.” Their sacrifices for the movement demanding eight-hours working day have not gone in vain and in every civilized country of the world it has become a norm, and often also a rule, and further shortening of the working day as also declaration of a longer weekend holidays have been progressing due to the concerted agitations of the toiling masses on whose labor and creative talents this entire modern economy is, and is being, built to ever majestic proportions. The resolution of the International Social Democratic Congress 1904 at Amsterdam declared: “The International Socialist Congress in Amsterdam calls upon all Social-Democratic Party organizations and trade unions of all countries to demonstrate energetically on May First for the legal establishment of the 8-hour day, for the class demands of the proletariat, and for universal peace. The most effective way of demonstrating on May First is by stoppage of work. The Congress therefore makes it mandatory upon the proletarian organizations of all countries to stop work on May First, wherever it is possible without injury to the workers.” And this was to be a step in the struggle for empowerment of the masses everywhere. So, it is very apt and essential that 1 May be and is celebrated the world over as the international working day – as a day of liberation, of festivity and of struggle of the masses. Thereafter, in course of time, the May Day has been declared a public holiday in several countries and in our country too; but, unfortunately, our Courts, which still seem to be steeped in the mire of feudal culture in this matter, neglect this historic occasion deliberately though they so easily shut themselves down on many an undeserving occasion. Well, eppur si muove… §§§

Editorial, AN INTERNATIONAL INQUIRY, in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 30 April 2015, Vol. 11, Part 1, No. 8 issue.

Editorial, ENCOUNTERS AGAIN, in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 15 April 2015, Vol. 11, Part 1, No. 7 issue.

Editorial, WISHING AND WAITING FOR A NEW DAWN, in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 15-31 March 2015 Martyrs Memorial Special issue.

WISHING & WAITING FOR A NEW DAWN

That is what many of us have been doing ever since independence, especially since the turbulent sixties. This new dawn symbolism could be interpreted in two ways. One would be to see the entire decades since the ‘transfer of power’ as a long dark night belying the aims and aspirations of innumerable martyrs of our freedom struggle and leaving but travails and tears for the people – still waiting for a new dawn that could bring in the much needed libertarian, welfarist sunlight. Another way of looking at could be that several dawns have come and gone by ever since but that we fondly dreamt of has eluded us so far. One set of rulers has come and gone,  giving way to another, which meant not much in practical terms. Mannerisms and wordings may have changed, even radical democratic ethos oriented ideologies, laws and schemes might have come up, but yet real progress has not been made. A simple illustration would be of the so-called ‘radical and innovative’ Right to Information Act. Some good might have come about due to it in some places and times, but also many loopholes there for the authorities to avoid giving the needed information and make the process more costly and cumbersome for the people. Perhaps the good old method of petitioning to the public authorities, if buttressed by strong and quick judicial monitoring, could be more handy, inexpensive and beneficial to the people at large. Also we see the power and aura of mammon overwhelming almost all sections of society like a Macbethian tormenting spirit. The present get-rich-quick-by-any-means trend is spelling doom to all the grand dreams of a glorious egalitarian society based on the mutual aid of a basically good-natured, well meaning citizenry. We see the basic needs of common people starkly neglected and the remedial mechanisms including courts reduced to more and more sloth and inefficiency. The new surge of free market economy generating an atmosphere of extreme alienation and misery among the people is ruining all chances of humane social progress. The only remedy is for the executive and judiciary, with the motto – small is beautiful and simple is workable – to feel and act as real public servants and not like lords divine/secular. Only when they begin to use public transport, live in duly alloted quarters and conduct on-the-spot enquiries often instead of closing their eyes and ears to the pleas of the common man,  in a word return to the practice of ‘high thinking and plain living’, can they even think of rooting out the societal ills and it is the duty and task of we the people to make for such an eventuality by our concerted efforts and agitations, and usher in the fresh sunrise.  §§§