‘Harassed for Doing Their Job’: Journalists Condemn Tripura Police’s Action Against 2 Reporters

After reporters Samridhi Sakunia and Swarna Jha were charged under various IPC sections by the Tripura police for covering the ongoing communal violence in the state, widespread support for their cause has come from various corners, within and outside the media.

New Delhi: The Tripura police’s arrest of two journalists – Samridhi Sakunia and Swarna Jha, of the HW News Network – on Sunday, November 14 drew criticism from several corners including journalist bodies, activists and politicians.

Appearing before a Tripura court in the state’s Gomati district on Monday, Sakunia and Jha were granted bail in the case but may have to remain in the state until police give the go ahead.

Sakunia and Jha were named in an FIR filed at the state’s Kumarghat police station for their reportage on the ongoing communal violence in the state. After initially being allowed to leave Tripura, the two reporters were detained in Assam on Sunday, supposedly at the behest of the Tripura police. Later that night, they were taken back to Tripura.

Also read: Tripura: Two Journalists Arrested for Covering Communal Violence, to Be Produced in Court Today

The FIR was filed by Kanchan Das, a leader of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) under IPC Sections 120 (B) (criminal conspiracy), 153 (A) (promoting enmity between different groups) and 504 (insulting, thereby giving provocation to break the public peace), as per a copy of the FIR shared by Sakunia on Twitter.

Das also allegedly accused the two reporters of “blaming” the VHP and the Bajrang Dal for burning a mosque in the state.

The Editors Guild of India (EGI) condemned the actions of Tripura police and demanded the release of the two journalists. While the Guild did not issue a statement itself, it retweeted the statement put out by HW.

The Foundation for Media Professionals (FMP) in a statement issued on Sunday condemned the filing of the FIR, noting that Sakunia (21) and Jha (25) were rendering a “public service” by bringing the instances of communal trouble in the state to light.

The FMP’s statement also made mention of the 102 members of civil society (including journalists and activists) who were booked by the Tripura police earlier under IPC sections as well as the notorious Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). It went on to note that, “The point of a free media is to bring to light problems and issues that may  otherwise escape the notice of responsible authorities,” and that the recent trend to arrest journalists for doing their jobs poses danger to “governance and Indian democracy.”

The Guwahati Press Club, expressing concerns over the arrests, demanded an unbiased inquiry into the matter. In a statement undersigned by president Manoj Nath and secretary Sanjoy Ray, the Club expressed relief that Sakunia and Jha were granted bail, noting that the freedom of the press should not be curbed at any cost.

Also read: Tripura Police Books 102 People Under UAPA for Social Media Posts Against Communal Violence

The DIGIPUB News India Foundation posted a similar statement on Twitter condemning the Tripura police’s decision to detain the two young journalists, describing them as “not only a violation of the freedom of the press but also a breach of the fundamental right to privacy.”

A joint statement by the Delhi Union of Journalists (DUJ) and the BrihanMumbai Union of Journalists (BUJ) welcomed the grant of bail, but also demanded that “all cases foisted on journalists and civil society activists for their reportage or social media posts be withdrawn forthwith. The intimidatory tactics by Tripura police must stop.”

The Indian Women’s Press Corps (IWPC), too, contended that the decision to detain the two journalists was egregious and also issued a statement expressing their solidarity with Sakunia and Jha, stating that, “The image of the government is not a journalist’s concern. Facts and the truth are their concern.”

Several journalists individually posted tweets of outrage.

Declaring the reporters’ arrest as a part of the ruling BJP’s “open war on democracy,” Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation (CPI-ML) leader Dipankar Bhattacharya, too, took to Twitter to extend support to the two reporters.

Journalists’ Bodies Slam Sedition FIRs Against Editors, Reporters for Farmers’ Rally Coverage

A total of three sedition cases have been filed across three BJP-ruled states against journalists Rajdeep Sardesai, Mrinal Pande and others.

New Delhi: Several media bodies on Friday strongly condemned the sedition FIRs against senior editors and journalists for their reporting on the farmers’ tractor rally and the ensuing violence in the capital on Republic Day, saying it was an attempt to “browbeat” and “intimidate” the media.

A total of three sedition cases have been filed across three BJP-ruled states (Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Haryana) against Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, India Today journalist Rajdeep Sardesai, National Herald’s senior consulting editor Mrinal Pande, Qaumi Awaz editor Zafar Agha, The Caravan magazine’s editor and founder Paresh Nath, The Caravan editor Anant Nath and its executive editor Vinod K. Jose, and one unnamed person for sharing “unverified” news during the farmers’ tractor rally.

The journalist bodies have released statements condemning that these editors have been “specifically targeted” for reporting the accounts pertaining to the death of one of the protesters on their personal social media handles as well as those of the publications they lead and represent.

The Press Club of India condemned the stringent moves by the respective state governments, and said “it is criminal to ascribe this as motivated reporting”.

“The editors from vary varied journalist enterprises have been accused of entering into a “conspiracy” to bring about discord between communities, defame the Sikh community and bring about confusion in a border state (Punjab) and, in effect, aid the country’s enemies. This would be laughable if it were not pointing to malignant motives on the part of a section of the political establishment and the police force under its authority. In short, the attempt is to vilify the journalists in question as anti-national,” the Press Club of India said in a statement.

Also read: After a Republic Day to Remember, Will the Prime Minister Finally Read the Signs?

Terming it as a move to muzzle the media, the journalists’ body has urged the authorities in Lucknow and Bhopal to withdraw the FIRs against the journalists. It also called upon the Union home ministry to reassess the situation and caution to the Uttar Pradesh and the Madhya Pradesh governments.

In a statement, the Editors Guild of India demanded that such FIRs be withdrawn immediately and the media be allowed to report without fear and with freedom.

“It must be noted that on the day of the protest and high action, several reports were emerging from eyewitnesses on the ground as well as from police, and therefore it was only natural for journalists to report all the details as they emerged. This is in line with established norms of journalistic practice,” the Guild said.

The Guild added it “strongly condemns the intimidating manner in the way in which the Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh Police” have registered FIRs against senior editors and journalists (including current and former office-bearers of EGI) for reporting on the farmers’ protest rallies and the ensuing violence that took place in the national capital on January 26.

“On a day thick with information, the EGI finds these FIRs, filed in different states, as an attempt to intimidate, harass, browbeat, and stifle the media,” the Guild said.

That the FIRs have been booked under a total of 10 different provisions, including sedition laws, promoting communal disharmony, and insulting religious beliefs, is further disturbing, it said.

The Guild also reiterated its earlier demand that the higher judiciary takes serious cognisance of the fact that several laws such as a sedition are often used to impede freedom of speech, and issue guidelines to ensure that “wanton use of such laws does not serve as a deterrent to a free press”.

Also read: Res-Publica: The Ground We Share

The Indian Women’s Press Corps (IWPC) also “unequivocally” condemned the UP Police’s decision to file an FIR for sedition against Mrinal Pande, founder president of the IWPC, along with several leading journalists, allegedly because they shared “unverified” news during the farmers’ tractor rally in Delhi on Republic Day.

In a statement, the IWPC said it believes that the charges against Pande, who has been the editor of several leading news publications in the country, is a “smack of a deliberate attempt to misrepresent the situation”.

“It is an attempt to browbeat the media and push it to fall in line,” the IWPC said.

The Delhi Union of Journalists has demanded that the cases against the journalists be withdrawn immediately. “We reiterate our demand for a special law to protect media persons from arbitrary charges, arrests and prosecution for doing their job. We urge the repeal of draconian laws including the law on sedition,” it said.

The Union also expressed concerns about the attempted break-in at journalist Neha Dixit’s home, demanding the prosecution of the guilty.

Rebellion Brews in Press Council Ranks Over Delays in Sending Fact-Finding Team to Kashmir

According to members, chairman Justice C.K. Prasad has been reluctant to send the team to the Valley. At least three visits planned by the team from August onwards have been cancelled.  

New Delhi: A rebellion is brewing within the ranks of the Press Council of India over the way chairman Justice C.K. Prasad has allegedly stymied all efforts by a fact-finding team to visit Jammu and Kashmir.

Soon after the Union government ended the constitutional autonomy of Jammu and Kashmir and decided to bifurcate the state, the PCI on August 22 held a meeting and decided to send a fact-finding team to understand the impact of the communication lockdown on the press. 

However, even after three months, the team has still not been able to visit the state.

Also read: Tourists ‘Welcome’ in J&K, but Press Council’s Fact-Finding Team Asked to Wait

“It is shameful that the team has still not been allowed to go,” Jaishankar Gupta, a PCI member and senior journalist told The Wire. 

“A four-member team to be headed by P.K. Dash was constituted to probe the gag on the press as a result of the government’s decisions. First, it was decided that the team would leave in September but it was not allowed to go. Then the team thought it could visit the state in the first week of October. Even that did not happen,” he said. 

“It’s November now. The tourism ban has been lifted. The government has allowed parliamentarians from Europe to visit the state but the PCI fact-finding team has still not gone,” he added. 

Another council member, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that ever since the fact-finding team was constituted, chairman Prasad has been reluctant to send it to the Valley. 

“He discouraged the team from visiting the state. He said there is no point going, and that the team would not be welcomed there. Then he said the team can go only if the state administration extends its hospitality to PCI. The state administration, then under Satyapal Malik governorship, refused us entry,” he said.

Whenever the PCI’s fact-finding teams visit a spot to conduct their enquiries, state governments usually take care of logistical arrangements like vehicles, security and accommodation. The council has regularly sent teams to enquire into press freedom in insurgency-affected areas of the country. In recent times, the PCI has sent its fact-finding teams to Uttar Pradesh’s Shamli, where a journalist was badly beaten up by the police, and to Sonbhadra, where a scribe was arrested. 

When the team decided that it could go without the J&K administration’s support, the chairman did not allow it to proceed, the member said. Instead, he allegedly kept pushing the date. At least three visits planned by the team from August onwards have been cancelled.  

Also read: Press Council Intervenes in SC Petition to Back Media Restrictions in J&K

The team still felt that it could go in the first week of October, which was after two months of communications lockdown in the state, but the convenor of the team, Dash, backed out at the last moment. 

“The convenor declined to lead the team. He said he wasn’t keeping well and is recovering from a personal tragedy. He said that the other three members could go if they wanted. But even that did not happen,” said the member, who did not want to be named. 

He said that when the fact-finding team was constituted, the chairman had nominated Das as its convenor. “Generally, the convenor of the team is unanimously chosen by the members but at that time no one objected to the chairman’s decision. We thought at least a team has been formed.”

He added that the convenor withdrew just when the team had decided to insist on visiting Jammu and Kashmir. “Although he refused to be part of the fact-finding team, he regularly attended council meetings. That was strange as it seemed the chairman and convenor got together to prevent the team from going,” the member said, adding that it is perhaps too late now for the team to go. 

Also read: The Failing Art of Selling Normalcy in Kashmir

“The state has been bifurcated into two Union Territories. Winter has already arrived. The capital has shifted from Srinagar to Jammu. There is no point going to Jammu alone,” he said. 

Gupta said that by not allowing the team to go, the PCI had marred its reputation as an independent institution. “We are not the government’s tool. The PCI has a statutory role as a media watchdog. Its primary role is to preserve the freedom of the press. Yet, it’s a shame that the team was not allowed to go,” said Gupta. 

Also read: Journalists Call Press Council’s Support to Kashmir Media Restrictions ‘Deplorable’

The PCI was recently in the centre of a political storm when chairman Prasad unilaterally sought permission from the Supreme Court to intervene in a petition filed by Kashmir Times executive editor Anuradha Bhasin.

Bhasin had demanded that communications restrictions be ended in J&K but the PCI’s affidavit, quite opposite to its mandate, said the ban on communication and free movement, was “in the interest of the integrity and sovereignty of the nation”. 

However, after most media associations and a few council members condemned this move by the PCI, it was forced to backtrack. It later decided to tell the Supreme Court that it did not approve of the restrictions on Kashmir’s media, and would rather submit a detailed reply after its fact-finding team submits a report. 

With the fact-finding team still struggling to visit the state, it seems unlikely that the PCI would submit a report anytime soon. 

Tourists ‘Welcome’ in J&K, but Press Council’s Fact-Finding Team Asked to Wait

The J&K government has informed the Press Council of India that its fact-finding team can visit only after November 4.

New Delhi: Just two days after Jammu and Kashmir governor Satya Pal Malik directed the withdrawal of the advisory issued on August 2 asking all tourists to leave the state in the lead up to the reading down of Article 370, the additional secretary to the government of J&K informed the Press Council of India (PCI) that its fact-finding team can visit the state only after November 4.

The 28-member council had decided to send a four-member subcommittee to assess the situation. Toward this end, they wrote to the government of J&K on August 27.

The response from the additional secretary, received on October 9 via email, says the council’s request was processed and “keeping in view the present security scenario in the state and due to move of offices from Srinagar to Jammu,” the sub-committee could visit the state any day after November 4.

Responding to the additional secretary’s email, P.K. Dash, convenor of the PCI’s sub-committee, told the state government that the date for the Press Council team’s proposed visit to the state is October 12 to October 17. However, is not clear if the team will travel as scheduled in the light of the state government’s reluctance to have it visit the Valley now.

PCI has been in the eye of the storm ever since chairman Justice C.K. Prasad unilaterally intervened in a petition filed in the Supreme Court by Kashmir Times executive editor Anuradha Bhasin demanding an end to communications restrictions in the state. The move drew strong condemnation from top media bodies and individual journalists, including present and former members of the council.

Also read: The Failing Art of Selling Normalcy in Kashmir

Media bodies that criticised the PCI chairman’s move include Editors Guild of India, Press Association, Indian Women’s Press Corps (IWPC), Indian Journalists Union, Working News Cameraman Association, Press Club of India, National Alliance of Journalists and the Delhi Union of Journalists. The chairman’s move came as a shock to even current members of the council, who stated that they had not even been informed about the intervention.

In what appeared to be a face-saving move following bitter criticism, the PCI had reversed its position. It proposed to present a plea before the apex court that, “the Council stands for the freedom of the press and does not approve of any sort of restriction on the media. A detailed reply shall be filed on receipt of the report of the sub-committee”.

Women’s Press Corp Cancels Permission Given to Bhim Army to Hold Press Meet

Azad’s lawyer says the press meet was to highlight the unprecedented move of holding a court inside a police station in Delhi which remanded 96 activists to 14-day judicial remand.

New Delhi: In a sudden decision, the Indian Women’s Press Corp (IWPC) withdrew permission given to Dalit rights organisation Bhim Army to hold a press conference scheduled for today on its premises.

Senior advocate Mehmood Paracha told The Wire that he, as the legal counsel for Bhim Army chief Chandrasekhar Azad and 95 others who were sent to 14-day judicial remand by a Delhi local court judge on August 22, was to address the press meet.

“What we wanted to highlight at the press meet was something unprecedented that happened in the country on August 22 which indicated that we have become an unofficial police state but the media hadn’t taken note of it. I had never heard of this before, but a court was held inside Delhi’s Kalkaji police station to hear the case of the 96 people arrested from a march to protest the demolition of a Ravidas Temple in South Delhi. There is a provision in the law where a judge can move the court to a school if, say, 5,000 people are accused of a crime because they can’t be accommodated in a small court room. But in this case, there were not even 100 people. This was what we wanted to highlight but were not allowed,” he said.

Also read: Press Council Intervenes in SC Petition to Back Media Restrictions in J&K

He said the press meet was to be held at 4 pm on August 23. “But around 2.30 pm, we got a mail from IWPC saying it is withdrawing the permission because as per its rules, it can’t give out space to a political or a religious organisation. But Bhim Army is neither. It is a social organisation,” Paracha said.

“Most organisations are under some pressure or the other these days from the government but we expected a journalists’ organisation not to bow down to police threat. We also feel it was connivance with the powers be as the last minute cancellation ensured that we couldn’t find an alternate venue to hold the important press meet,” he added.

On August 22, Azad and others were arrested after the march towards the demolition site in Tughlakabad area of South Delhi turned violent. The temple was demolished by the Delhi Development Authority on August 10 as per a Supreme Court order.

An IWPC member told The Wire that after the area SHO inquired about the press conference at their office on New Delhi’s Rafi Marg, the president, senior journalist Jyoti Malhotra, decided to cancel the permission given to Bhim Army.

She said, “The president later explained to us in our WhatsApp group that the permission was granted to Bhim Army because she was not fully aware of the rules which said the premises can’t be given for use by religious and political organisations. But some founding members of the club reminded her of it in the last minute, following which she withdrew the decision.”

Also read: Dalit Protest Over Temple Demolition Turns Violent, Cops Resort to ‘Mild Lathi Charge’

Though Bhim Army chief Chandrasekhar Azad declared that he would contest the last general elections against Prime Minister Narendra Modi from Varanasi, he later withdrew his candidature. Bhim Army, as Paracha pointed out, calls itself a social organisation that fights for Dalit rights.

The member said, “The president also told us that we don’t mind inviting Azad to IWPC to interact with our members, like we do with other political leaders but we can’t allow him to hold a press meet on our premises.”

Some members, she added, questioned the move “as it showed IWPC in bad light” and sought better clarity of the rules.   

Over 50 Women Journalists Support Reporter Behind Tamil Nadu Sand Mafia Exposé

Sandhya Ravishankar has been receiving threats and abusive messages ever since she published a four-part exposé on the sand mafia in The Wire.

Sandhya Ravishankar. Courtesy: Facebook/Sandhya Ravishankar

Sandhya Ravishankar. Courtesy: Facebook/Sandhya Ravishankar

New Delhi: More than 50 women journalists have written a letter to the Tamil Nadu government in support of Chennai-based journalist Sandhya Ravishankar, who has been receiving threats and abusive messages ever since she published a four-part exposé on the sand mafia in The Wire.

In the letter submitted through the Tamil Nadu principal resident commissioner, the journalists have asked chief minister E.K. Palaniswamy to intervene in the matter and ensure Ravishankar’s safety in practicing her profession, in addition to making sure that those guilty of threatening and trying to intimidate her are brought to justice.

“We the undersigned women journalists, would like to bring to your kind notice the threats and sustained harassment faced by Ms Sandhya Ravishankar, a Chennai based journalist. It is a matter of grave concern that Ms Ravishankar has been targeted with threats to her person following her investigative stories,” the letter says. “We request you to kindly intervene in this matter and ensure that Ms Ravishankar is allowed to pursue her vocation without any intimidation of any kind. We also urge your good office to identify and take strict action against those who are threatening her.”

Signatories to the letter include T.K. Rajalakshmi of Frontline, Amiti Sen of Business Line, Santwana Bhattachaya of the New Indian Express and Shobhna Jain of VNI News.

President of the Delhi-based Indian Women’s Press Corps Sushma Ramachandran told The Wire that the organisation has written a letter to Ravishankar expressing their support. They are also planning to write a letter to the Tamil Nadu chief minister very soon, asking that the threats against Ravishankar be taken very seriously and she be offered protection.

Back-and-Forth Continues in Women’s Press Corps Over ‘Nationalist’ Clause in Booking Form

While several members of the Indian Women’s Press Corps have asked that the clause be removed, office bearers say they are trying to protect members’ interests and do not adhere to the BJP’s views of what is ‘anti-national’.

While several members of the Indian Women’s Press Corps have asked that the clause be removed, office bearers say they are trying to protect members’ interests and do not adhere to the BJP’s views of what is ‘anti-national’.

The IWPC in Delhi. Courtesy: iwpc.info

The IWPC in Delhi. Courtesy: iwpc.info

New Delhi: In the wake of reports that the Indian Women’s Press Corps (IWPC) in Delhi had added a ‘nothing anti-national’ undertaking to the form members have to fill if they want to book the location for an event, members have demanded deletion of the controversial clause.

“Nothing will be said [at the event] which will be anti-national, question the integrity of the country, amount to sedition or cause harm to the reputation of the club,” the clause on the IWPC venue booking form states. What this entails is not clarified or explained.

Ever since the introduction of this clause was publicised last week, it has drawn criticism from several quarters, including various members of the the group. Senior journalist and editor Mrinal Pande, founding president of the club, spoke out against it at the Jaipur Literary Festival, saying that that she is not in support of anything that “militates against my integrity” and that if required she will rebel against a group that she helped found.

A letter signed by 134 members of the IWPC, sent to the club’s president and general secretary, has expressed “strong objection” to this clause and demanded its removal. The members have also questioned a statement that the president of the IWPC, Sushma Ramachandran, released last week, saying that the IWPC “needed to put this particular clause to protect our premises from misuse by vested interests. … it was introduced as a matter of abundant caution following the incident where questions were posed to the management of a club for acts about which they were not responsible. We in the IWPC are committed to safeguard the club’s interests.”

Ramachandran’s reference is to the police questioning Delhi University faculty members S.A.R. Geelani and Ali Javed last year over the alleged chanting of pro-Kashmiri freedom slogans by members of the audience at an event at the Press Club of India.

“IWPC is neither a social club, nor a political one. It is a journalists’ club where freedom of speech and expression have been and must continue to be encouraged and protected. Press clubs in all democratic countries have always been spaces where all shades of opinion — including criticism of government policies and state action, dissenting views of all sorts — are heard and discussed. As independent journalists, we draw power from the fact that we listen, report and disseminate varied and varying opinions. Thus, as independent journalists it is our duty – individually and collectively – to ensure no opinion or stand is judged beforehand as being worthy of being expressed or not. IWPC, as an institution founded, created and belonging to journalists who firmly believe in the freedom of speech and expression, cannot be allowed to fall prey to the spurious debate on what is nationalist and what is anti-national. Journalists are not and can never be arbiters of what amounts to sedition,” the members’ letter says.

So why did the IWPC feel the need to introduce this clause in the first place?

According to a senior office bearer of the IWPC, this clause was added when controversy erupted around the event on Kashmir held at the Press Club of India. The clause is not new but has been in the booking form since August 2016, when the form was edited to add several clauses on liability – including on issues such as broken crockery, damage to property and so on. However, she added, the IWPC managing committee will be meeting in the first week of February and will take into account all the voices that have been raised, and discuss whether the clause needs to be reworded, removed or retained. “The term anti-national has become very politically loaded, almost as if what is ‘national’ has been appropriated by the BJP. That is not how we meant it. We are a professional journalists institution, not based on an ideology,” she told The Wire. “For us, it’s not about being anti-government or pro-government. ‘Nationalist’ should not mean pro-BJP. Before the BJP came to power, these terms were not so loaded. Why should we allow one party to define what is national?”

This clause, she added, was meant to ensure that the organisation as a whole is not held responsible if something goes wrong and members are careful about the kind of events held. “There have been situations where FIRs have been filed against journalists (for simply being around an event) and we want to insulate our members from such incidents,” she said. According to her, this clause is meant to protect against cases where there might be a scuffle or violence of some sort. “This is a measure of abundant caution,” she continued. “But we will be taking all views into account in the upcoming meeting and take a decision accordingly.”

The office bearer also raised questions on the timing of the controversy. “This clause has been around since August, yet it is only now that it is being brought to the public eye,” suggesting that it may be an attempt to undermine the current managing committee’s work before the March-April elections. “We have hosted all kinds of people at the IWPC, from across the political spectrum.”

The IWPC has held several events, both recently and in the past, which have been critical of government actions. In early January, the club hosted an event by the Campaign for Peace and Justice in Chhattisgarh and Women against Sexual Violence and State Repression about alleged state atrocities in Naxal areas.

Although the IWPC felt constrained to add a restrictive condition to its booking form last year, other venues in the capital that often hold seminars and other events, including the India Habitat Centre and India International Centre, told The Wire they did not have any clauses on what can or cannot be said at an event that a member has to agree to at the time of booking the venue.