“Freedom of the press, if it means anything at all, means the freedom to criticize and oppose” This quote by Sir Jeorge Orwell in a true sense makes a sarcastic remark over the condition of the freedom of press and the freedom of speech and expression with respect to the journalism and media in India.
Recently, a report was published on The Hindu’s Chairman N. Ram an exclusive story based on the documents of the ministry of defence (MOD) establishing thet Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) was directly in connection in negotiation with the French officials on the Rafale fighter plane which has become a controversial issue in the Indian politics. As per the report, the officials of the MoD raised a red flag over the “parallel negotiations” made by the PMO.
The above report was criticised, blamed and even threatened by several section of media, government and the BJP including the offensive tweet from the official twitter handle of BJP against The Hindu. Even more recently a threat was given by the attorney general for such publication raising a serious question over the freedom of press and well as the freedom of speech and expression in India.
N Ram, Chairman of The Hindu publishing group, responded strongly to Attorney-General KK Venugopal’s argument in the Supreme Court that the documents on the Rafale deal were “stolen” and those publishing them were guilty under the Official Secrets Act.
He asserted that “we are fully protected by the Article 19(1) A of the Indian Constitution, the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression and also by the Right to Information Act, specifically 8(1)(i) and 8(2), which overrides the Official Secrecy Act” and that “there is no question of any national security being compromised by it”.
“Today it’s not just The Hindu, but also some other independent news publications which have put out material on Rafale. There has been an overarching fear in the media ecosystem under this government but the Indian press is now willing to do more. And the very fact that issue has been covered in a big way shows that the blanket of silence that some would like to be imposed on this matter has been breached,” he said.
The Rafale Controversy and the Freedom of Speech
The Rafale controversy is a political deal controversy which arose in September 2016 when the Ministry of Defence (India) made a deal of 7.87 billion Euros with a France’s company Dassault Aviation to purchase 36 multirole fighter aircraft known as Rafale. The opposition made several allegations over the government regarding price escalation and favourism and slowly this issue became the most controversial topic in Indian politics.
After the recent publication of an article in The Hindu about some sensitive aspects of the Rafale deal and the alleged “parallel negotiations” by PMO in the form of influence intervention raised a controversy leading to the criticism, blame and even threat by several section of media, government and the BJP including the offensive tweet from the official twitter handle of BJP against The Hindu.
The attorney General K.K Venugopal referred to an article in The Hindu on March, 6, saying “sensitive” information like the price of the weapons is now in the public domain. The government had not wanted it to disclose for the sake of national security. He further alleged that the “secret” documents published on the purchase of 36 Refale jets were “stolen” from the ministry of defence, probably by former employees.
This gave rise to all new controversy in the form of curtailment of freedom of press and the freedom of speech and expression but it is also a well settled fact that the freedom of speech and expression as well as the freedom of press has to be dealt harmoniously with the concept of larger public interest and national security. Kelly has been quoted often as to say, “Constitutional provisions should not be construed in isolation from all other parts of the constitution, but should be construed as to harmonize with those other parts”.
But, in any democracy, media- whether print or electronic plays a vital role in one’s life. Media which is known as the best medium of communication with the mass and the 4th pillar of any democracy with a purpose of dissemination of information holds the power to change public opinion at any time. If this 4th pillar will not be allowed to report truly without any corporate or political influence then only the basic purpose of the media can be served. Media is born to dig out the truth even though it is detrimental to government or any person of higher influence and giving threats or restricting media from such reporting in the name of public interest or national security is a serious threat towards the growth of the country.
The Controversy Continues..
As per the news analysis by “Varghese k. George” there are basically four main reasons for which the line of attack against The Hindu story on Rafale is not only shallow, but also implicates the Narendra Modi Government further.
1. No Single Report on a topic is the last word on it– Anything which is published, is something a publisher can get and find relevant. Mere reporting should not be taken as a judgement. To find the truth, the entire truth must be dig for more rather questioning over the “best obtainable version of truth” which was brought by “The Hindu”.
2. Parrikar note implicates, not absolves, the PMO– The reason stated in the article was the contradiction in between the note written by Manohar Parrikar and the statement given by the government. In his note he was not vouching for the propriety of the PMO’s “parallel negotiations” and wanted defence secretary to deal with PMO. This whole seems like a loop.
3. PMO role in the negotiations hidden from Supreme Court- The third argument stated in the analysis was the statement given by the defendants (government) in the Sc that there is nothing more which SC can examine establishing the fact that PMO was playing a direct role in negotiations and shifting the entire onus of the outcome on INT.
4. PMO role is not supervisory or of oversight, it is blindsiding the principle of ministry- The forth reason stated herein was the controversial role of Prime Minister Office as supervision would have involved the Principle Secretary or the NSA but what the PMO has done is to keep the entire Ministry of Defence blindsided on an issue that is directly under their purview and start a parallel process with the foreign government.
In a nutshell in the words of “Mokokoma Mokhonoana” it can be said that freedom of speech is unnecessary if the people to whom it is granted do not think for themselves. With respect to the current issue freedom of speech and expression is in direct relation with the freedom of press and such relation nowhere allows such threats over journalism and media. The harmonious construction of larger public and state security with such freedom of press should be there but the digging of truth also matters, even if the government itself is in question.
