NEW DELHI: Half a dozen journalists’ organisations of the capital on Wednesday described the proposed Broadcasting Services Bill 2023 as the government expanding censorship and increasing its control over all types of the media from TV channels to films, Online Streaming platforms like Netflix and Prime Video, YouTube, Instagram and even the social platforms as well as the news websites.
They said the Bill blurs the distinction between journalism and content creation and its definition is deliberately left so broad that all sorts of online media can be controlled by clubbing both broadcast and digital media, although the broadcast media includes the big channels as also the small outfits run by one or two persons.
The organisations, which included Delhi Union of Journalists and the National Alliance of Journalists, said the Bill could wait till the formation of a common body like a Media Commission of India, comprising experts and stake holders to look into all aspects of the government control. They wanted the Bill rolled back forthwith as it is ominously silent on the concentration of the media ownership that is a big threat to freedom of expression and diversity of opinion.
Bill averse to freedom of speech and press: EGI
In a clear and strong submission to the union minister for Information & Broadcasting, Anurag Thakur, the Editors Guild of India (EGI) has already detailed how the provisions of the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023 are both vague and excessively intrusive, adverse to both the freedom of expression and freedom of press.
Presenting its detailed submissions on the Bill, a press statement of the EGI states that it is “concerned that many of the provisions of the draft are vague and excessively intrusive. Since the bill will cover all broadcasting services, including news broadcasting, and also extend the regulatory framework to cover digital news platforms, the Guild is deeply concerned that the bill will, therefore, be adverse to the spirit of freedom of speech and freedom of press guaranteed by the constitution. Some of the salient points of concern are:
Details of the Guild’s objections to specific clauses are contained in the annexure that has been prepared with support from the Internet Freedom Foundation. For the purposes of these comments, the term “broadcasters” will be used to mean “broadcasters and broadcasting network operators.”
The Guild has requested that the Modi 2.0 government puts the draft in abeyance and undertake meaningful consultation with all the stakeholders.
The Editors Guild of India [“EGI”] is an organisation established in 1978 to protect freedom of the press and to raise the standards of editorial leadership of newspapers and magazines. It was on November 10, 2023, that the I & B ministry had released the draft of the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023, and invited comments and feedback from the public on the same.
On January 31, after a wait for almost four months, a split judgment has been delivered in the petitions filed in the Bombay High Court against the 2023 amendment to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules. The amendment, which provide for setting up fact check units empowered to identify and tag what it considers false or fake online news for any activity of the Central government, had been challenged before the High Court by comedian Kunal Kamra and others.
On Wednesday, during the pronouncement of the verdict by the division bench of Justices GS Patel and Neela Gokhale, it was stated that the division bench has written two separate judgments. As per a report in the Bar&Bench, the judgment of Justice Patel is in the favour of the petitioners while the judgment by Justice Gokhale has held against the petitioners and has upheld the validity of the 2023 amendment rules. It was further provided by the bench that since the division bench has not been able to reach a decision, the case will now go back to the Chief Justice of the High Court, who will then assign the same to a third judge.
While the bench had suggested a period of four weeks for the Chief Justice to form a third bench, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta expressed his issue with continuing the stay on the amendment any further. To this, the bench had then pointed that the same stay had been continuing since April of 2023. With this, a period of ten days has been given for the same. Notably, the stay on the said amendment to the IT Rules will also be continued till then.
What is problematic about the IT Rules, 2023?
The IT Rules, 2023 bring a new twist to Rule 3(b)(v) of the IT Rules, 2021, shaking up the landscape for intermediaries’ due diligence. Under the amendments, intermediaries are now tasked with going above and beyond to prevent users from publishing or circulating any content related to the Central Government that’s deemed “fake,” “false,” or “misleading.” What’s more is that this determination will be made solely by a “fact check” unit handpicked by none other than the Central Government itself. Failure to keep up with “due diligence” could lead intermediaries down a treacherous path, risking their safe harbour status under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000.
Feeling suffocated by the new regulations, political satirist and comedian Kunal Kamra (filed on April 10, 2023), the Association of Indian Magazines and the Editors Guild of India, have filed writ petitions before the Bombay High Court challenging the constitutionality of this provision. In his bold move, Kunal Kamra, particularly, argues that these rules not only strangle freedom of expression and speech but also defy natural justice while infringing upon Article 14, 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g), going beyond the boundaries set by Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000. The Union’s response merely echoes the purported purpose of these rules – to combat misinformation – asserting that it seeks to shield against false news rather than curtail creators’ rights.
Full judgement can be read here.
—–
Have you liked the news article?