People's Democracy

(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)


Vol. XXVII

No. 46

November 16, 2003

 Journalists March to Tamilnadu House in Delhi

 

ON November 10, slogan shouting journalists took to the streets again in New Delhi and marched to the Tamilnadu House to protest the state assembly’s action against The Hindu and Murasoli journalists.

 

The journalists belonging to several media organisations marched in the afternoon from Teen Murti to the Tamilnadu House on the Kautilya Marg. The marchers were stopped by a strong posse of Delhi Police about 100 metres from the Tamilnadu House, but they broke through the barricade, saying No to “Amma’s” anti-press measures in Tamilnadu.

 

The journalists shouted slogans demanding withdrawal of the assembly order and dismissal of the Jayalalithaa government for its “assault on the freedom of the press,” that smacks of the dark days of Emergency.

 

The protestors submitted a memorandum to the Tamilnadu governor through the state’s resident commissioner here, demanding withdrawal of the assembly’s order to jail the journalists for 15 days for breach of privilege.

 

The memorandum was signed by the Press Club of India president Prakash Patra, Indian Journalists Union president Suresh Akhouri, Indian Women’s Press Corps president Aarti Jerath, Editors Guild of India secretary general Alok Mehta and Delhi Union of Journalists (DUJ) president S K Pande and general secretary Javed Faridi, among others. It was endorsed by several newspaper unions in Delhi, affiliated to the All India Newspaper Employees Federation.

 

“The Tamilnadu Assembly has arrogated to itself extraordinary powers to punish journalists for criticising members of the assembly. This is an untenable and, in our view, unconstitutional interpretation of the scope of the privileges. This amounts to abuse of privilege,” the memorandum said. It further said, “Through you, we call on the Tamilnadu legislative assembly to reconsider and rescind its unfortunate resolution of November 7, 2003.”

 

Though the Supreme Court had stayed the arrest of the journalists the same morning, the journalists decided to go ahead with their protest march because “we see the issue as an unprovoked and unjustifiable attempt to curb the freedom of expression.” The Delhi Union of Journalists (DUJ) welcomed the Supreme Court judgement as another nail in the coffin of those striving to make the press crawl to state government satraps and forego all criticism. In effect it was a slap in the face of those who sought to muzzle the press. It was yet another victory for those who cherished democracy, the DUJ added.

 

It may be recalled that the Supreme Court has stayed till further orders the Tamilnadu assembly’s controversial decision of sentencing five senior journalists of The Hindu and the editor of Murasoli to 15 days simple imprisonment for breach of privilege. The Supreme Court has issued notices to all the parties in the case. A two-judge bench comprising Justices Y K Sabharwal and S B Sinha issued the notices, returnable within three weeks, to the Tamilnadu assembly speaker K Kalimuthu, the secretary of the assembly, the state government, the state’s director general of police, the attorney general of India Soli Sorabjee as well as the Karnataka government and the state’s DGP.

 

The November 7 decision, which evoked countrywide protest from journalists and political parties, was stayed by the bench during the preliminary hearing of two petitions filed by the aggrieved party. “There shall be a stay forthwith on the warrants of arrest issued pursuant to the decision of the state assembly,” Justice Sabharwal said, adding that the court’s stay order would be immediately communicated to the Tamilnadu DGP.

 

The petitions heard by the court had urged it to declare as illegal the assembly’s resolution sentencing them and to quash the same.

 

JAYALALITHA EFFIGY BURNT

 

EARLIER, carrying placards of the Delhi Union of Journalists (DUJ) and the Press Club of India (PCI), journalists including editors and key mediapersons had come out on the streets in the national capital on November 8, demanding an end to attacks on the press in Tamilnadu. This they said was an “assault” on the freedom of the press.

 

Shouting slogans against the Tamilnadu chief minister Ms Jayalalithaa Jayaram, a large number of journalists then held a sit-in outside the Press Club building and blocked traffic for half an hour. They also burnt a Jayalalithaa effigy.

 

Addressing the protestors, veteran journalist Kuldip Nayyar said former Delhi High Court chief justice Rajinder Sachar had filed a habeas corpus petition on his behalf, seeking production of the journalists against whom arrest warrants had been issued. Others who spoke were Nihal Singh, Mrinal Pande, H K Dua and Prakash Patra.

 

The DUJ had called upon its members to be ready for direct action during the coming session of parliament if attacks on the press, such as those seen in Tamilnadu, continued. The DUJ stand was endorsed by several newspaper unions in Delhi, DUJ president S K Pande announced at the Press Club during the meeting attended by several editors and journalists besides those from newspaper unions. What is needed is the widest possible united front to fight not only the defamation laws but also the authoritarian regimes that are intolerant of the freedom of expression. The press is supposed to be free and yet is in many chains, he said. He also recalled the attacks on the press since the Emergency to date.

 

Demanding that the “sentence” handed down to six journalists by the state assembly must be withdrawn forthwith, the DUJ said it was high time the nation debate the codification of the “privileges” enjoyed by members of legislative assemblies and of parliament.

 

The November 8 meeting also said that the Tamilnadu assembly’s action to convict individuals without even giving them the basic right to be heard and to present their defence “reflected gross vindictiveness and unprecedented disdain for democratic practice.” The meeting also demanded “stern action against those police officials responsible for intimidating the family members of some of the journalists sentenced by the house.” (INN)