In India, publish and be
persecuted By Sudha Ramachandran
BANGALORE - Last week, the Tamil Nadu Assembly
ordered the arrest of senior editors and the publisher
of India's most respected English daily, The Hindu, and
the editor of a Tamil newspaper, Murasoli. The incident
is the most recent in a chain of instances in which the
government has sought to undermine democratic
institutions and browbeat the media, raising concern
over the growing intolerance of politicians in India to
criticism or challenge of any sort.
It was an
evening of high drama last Friday, when on the order of
the Tamil Nadu Assembly's privileges committee, police
officers entered the premises of The Hindu in Chennai to
arrest the editor, the executive editor, publisher and
two senior journalists. The charge against them was that
they had breached legislative privilege.
The
committee, which is dominated by the state's ruling
All-India Anna Dravida Munethra Kazhagam (AIADMK), found
an editorial published in the April 25 edition of The
Hindu - and reproduced subsequently in Murasoli - to
have "lowered the dignity" of the legislature by
tarnishing the name of Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa.
The editorial in question used words like "incensed",
"stinging", "diatribe" and "high-pitched tone" to
describe Jayalalithaa's speeches. Justifying the arrest
order, the speaker of the assembly said that "abusive
and intemperate language had been used against the chief
minister".
The Hindu is currently celebrating
the 125th year of its founding. It is one of India's
most influential and respected English dailies. It is
known for its responsible reporting. In fact, it is
generally regarded as a rather staid and sober newspaper
with an aversion for sensational journalism. The
Murasoli is the mouthpiece of the Dravida Munethra
Kazhagam (DMK), the main opposition party in Tamil Nadu.
Amma (mother) to the Tamil masses and
puratchi thalaivi (revolutionary leader) to her
ministers and party men (many of whom have her name
tattooed on their arms), Jayalalithaa, a former film
star, is notorious for her whimsical, authoritarian,
intolerant and vindictive ways. Since the AIADMK swept
to power in 2001, she has systematically pursued,
humiliated and jailed her political rivals, especially
those in the DMK.
She has used the Prevention of
Terrorism Act (POTA) against political rivals and
journalists. Vaiko, who goes by one name, a prominent
rival, was slapped with charges under POTA. He remains
in jail to date. In July, Jayalalithaa's administration
sacked nearly 200,000 government employees who were on
strike. Hundreds of workers were taken into custody. A
panel of two judges of the Supreme Court ruled that
employees did not have any fundamental right to strike
and that such illegal strikes had to be dealt with
firmly by the authorities. It suggested that the state
government reinstate the sacked workers, provided they
offered an unconditional apology. Incidentally, the
Bharatiya Janata Party-led coalition government in New
Delhi, big business and sections of the media praised
Jayalalithaa's "firm action" against the striking
workers. That it was a flagrant violation of the
democratic rights of the citizens was ignored.
The Tamil Nadu government has also filed cases
against other publications, including Dinakaran, The
Statesman, Dinamalar, Dinamani, New Indian Express and
Junior Vikatan. The Tamil magazine Nakkeeran has been
subject to police raids. Its employees have been
intimidated. Its editor has been arrested under POTA.
In her previous stint at the helm, Jayalalithaa
was as hostile to the press as she is today. From
1991-96, her government filed over 100 defamation cases
against media organizations and journalists. All these
cases were withdrawn just before the elections.
The recent crackdown on The Hindu and other
publications is therefore not an incident in isolation.
It is part of a larger attempt to eliminate alternate
centers of power and political opposition, to halt
criticism of Jayalalithaa's style of governance, indeed
of anyone who disapproves or speaks against any of her
policies.
The Supreme Court's subsequent issue
of a stay on the arrests on The Hindu and Murasoli
journalists has come as a slap in the face of the Tamil
Nadu government. But while this bout of the Jayalalithaa
vs media confrontation might have gone in favor of the
latter, Tamil Nadu's capricious chief minister is not
about to give up yet. She has filed another defamation
case against The Hindu for an article published on April
30. This is the 18th defamation case filed by her
government against The Hindu so far.
The
face-off between the Tamil Nadu government and The Hindu
has prompted a demand for a codification of legislative
privileges. It has raised concern on the erosion of
democratic rights and freedom in the country.
An
editorial in the Times of India points out: "The
assembly's decision to 'punish' the journalists raises
questions that go much beyond what is covered under the
phrase 'freedom of the press'. At stake are also issues
of overt political mala fides, constitutional
propriety and the nature of public political discourse
in the country," the editorial said.
"Are we
living in a constitutional society with guaranteed
rights for citizens and democratic institutions or are
we already into a dictatorial setup in which anything
said or written which is unpalatable to the government
is met with arbitrary punishment?" asked the Deccan
Herald in an editorial.
There are many instances
where the government, not just in Tamil Nadu, but in the
other states, and even the central government, has
hounded journalists who have written not-so-positive
pieces on its performance.
Last year, Time
magazine carried an article "Asleep at the wheel", which
depicted Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee as a
feeble, sick septuagenarian with an eating and drinking
problem. The article suggested that he was not fit
enough to be in charge of India's nuclear arsenal.
The Indian government bristled and shot off a
rejoinder, describing the article as baseless and
motivated. And then it went after the author of the
article, Alex Perry, Time magazine's correspondent in
New Delhi. Perry was hauled up for holding two passports
and asked to appear before the Foreigners Regional
Registration Office in the capital.
The Time
magazine article was, as an eminent Indian journalist B
G Varghese described, "rather silly". But it did not
call for harassment of the journalist. It showed the
extent to which the government is sensitive, in fact,
prickly to criticism.
A more serious level of
harassment was evident in the case of the news portal
Tehelka. Through a sting operation, Tehelka exposed a
scandal in defense purchases involving top brass in the
government and the defense forces. The expose was
followed by a witch hunt of Tehelka. Tehelka's office in
Delhi was raided several times. Its reporters have been
threatened and kept in custody on trumped up charges.
Aniruddha Bahal, who headed Tehelka's investigating team
and was one of two journalists who posed as arms
merchants, was arrested on charges of assaulting,
obstructing and abusing an officer of the Central Bureau
of Investigation. Another reporter, Kumar Badal, was
arrested for allegedly violating the country's wildlife
laws. The government's persecution of Tehelka has
extended to its investors too. The unprecedented
pressure that Tehelka was subjected to eventually forced
the portal to shut down.
The media, especially
the electronic and English media, in Gujarat came under
attack for their "biased reporting" on riots in that
state. While the Gujarati press, including the Gujarat
Samachar and Sandesh, defended the Narendra Modi
government's performance during the violence, the
electronic media and English dailies exposed its
complicity in the violence. Not only were reporters
covering the riots subject to attacks by mobs and even
the police, but also since then several reporters and
human rights activists have been targeted. The
experience of Mallika Sarabhai is an example. A noted
dancer and activist, Sarabhai has been at the forefront
of the battle against communalism in Gujarat. That has
earned her the wrath of the Modi government. A false
case relating to illegal immigration has been slapped on
her.
In the northern India state of Uttar
Pradesh, Mayawati, until recently chief minister, who
goes by one name, would unleash her wrath in public on
journalists who did not give her favorable coverage.
Journalists considered unfriendly to her government were
dropped from official press briefings or asked to vacate
government-provided housing.
Harassment of the
media by the government is not new in India. During the
emergency, 1975-1977, draconian restrictions were
imposed on the media. Hundreds of journalists, including
senior editors, were arrested and spent time in jail.
Electricity was cut off to newspapers that were not
"friendly enough". What is heartening is that the media
have always fought back.
Notwithstanding this
dreary picture of the assault on the media, it is a fact
that India has a vibrant media and have traditionally
enjoyed an enviable level of freedom. What is worrying
is that they are under threat. And while the press and
politicians have clashed frequently in the past, what is
of concern about the recent confrontations between the
two is that politicians in power are using the coercive
apparatus of the state to get the media to articulate
their line. It is part of the creeping climate of
political intolerance in the country.
(Copyright
2003 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication policies.)
Nov 13, 2003
No
material from Asia Times Online may be republished in any form without written
permission.
Copyright
2003, Asia Times Online, 4305 Far East Finance Centre, 16 Harcourt Rd,
Central, Hong Kong
