Accountability of Indian Media on Invading Privacy of the Individuals

Author: Akansha Sharma

Introduction India does not have an independent statute protecting privacy of the people so the right to privacy is a deemed right under the Constitution. The right to privacy has to be understood in the context of two fundamental rights which is the right to freedom under Article 19 and the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. In 2019 a writ petition is filled by Mr Ratan Tata before the Supreme Court of India alleging that the unauthorised publication of his private conversations with Nira Radia was in violation of his right to privacy. The writ filed by the industrialist didn't challenge the action of the Directorate-General of levy to record the private conversations for the aim of investigations. Instead, it absolutely was challenging the publication of the private conversations that befell between the industrialist and Nira Radia by the media. Whether the overall publication of those private conversations was within the interest of the general public has been widely debated. What the Tata episode brought into focus was the requirement for a law protecting the right to privacy in India. The purpose of this paper is to discribe the emerging privacy concerns in India and also the present media norms and guidelines on the right to privacy. Presently, the media is controlled by different principles defined by self-governing media bodies, a bit like the Press Council of India, the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and thus the Code of Ethics drafted by the News Broadcasting Standard Authority (NBSA). The paper examines this media norms, constitutional protection guaranteed to an individual’s right to privacy and upheld by courts, and thus the explanations the State employs to justify the invasion of privacy. Nowadays, the matter arising whether the media is crossing limits in commenting on celebrities and encroaching on the privacy of public figures, blackmailing those in authority and promoting trial by media in cases pending consideration before the numerous courts of the country. Freedom of the media is indeed an integral part of the liberty of expression and essential for a democratic country. This freedom is a Fundamental Right granted by the Indian constitution. The media which is obligated to respect the rights of individual, is additionally obligated to figure within the framework of legal principles and statutes. These principles/statutes are framed by way of minimum standards and don't shall reduce from higher standards of protection to the liberty of expression. The media is that the Fourth limb of a democratic system, the legislature, executive and judiciary being the opposite three. While legislature prepares the law for the society and also the executive takes necessary steps for implementing them, the third stepping-stone is that the judiciary, which must ensure legality of all actions and decisions. The Fourth Estate i.e. the press must operate within the framework of those statutes and constitutional provision to act publicly and national interest. this can be indicative of the actual fact that no-one is above law. When the Constitution of India guaranteed freedom of expression and speech to its citizens, it ensured that the liberty wasn't absolute and any expression, by way of words, speech or visual medium, failed to violate any statutory provisions enacted by legislature and executed by the manager. If the media, electronic or print, exceeded its jurisdiction, the courts came forward to confirm that violation of the basic rights by the media doesn't go unchecked. Constitutional Framework of Privacy The right to privacy is recognised below the Constitution of Republic of India as a elementary right. It's already stated the right to freedom under article 19 and also the right to life under article 21 of the Constitution. As per article 19(1) (a) that guarantees all voters the right to freedom of speech and expression. It's the right to freedom of speech and expression that permits the media the right to publish any data. Reasonable restrictions on the exercise within the interests of integrity and sovereignty of the State, the protection of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in regard to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to associate offence is that the right obligatory by the State. Article 21 of the Constitution states, "No person shall be bereft of his life or personal liberty except in step with procedure established by law." Courts have inferred the right to privacy as underlying the right to life. International Conventions Internationally the right to privacy has been protected during a variety of conventions. For example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 (UDHR) under Article 12 provides that: "No one shall be subjected to discretional interference together with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, or to attacks upon his honour and name. Everybody has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks." The Universal Declaration of Human Rights protects any discretional interference from the State to a person’s right to privacy. Similarly, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1976 (ICCPR) below Article seventeen imposes the State to confirm that people are protected by law against “arbitrary or unlawful interference together with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and name. Thus, making certain that States enact laws to safeguard individual’s right to privacy. Republic of India has sanctioned the higher than conventions. The commendation of the Conventions mandates the State to require steps to enact laws to safeguard its voters. Although, right activists have sporadically demanded that the State take adequate measures to safeguard human rights of the vulnerable in society, the right to privacy has received very little attention. Similarly, Article sixteen of the Convention on the Rights of the kid (CRC) provides protection to a minor from any unlawful interference to his/her right to privacy and imposes a positive obligation on States United Nations agency have sanctioned the convention to enact a law protective an equivalent. Republic of India will have safeguards in situ to safeguard identity of minors, especially, juveniles and victims of abuse. However, there ar exceptions once the law on privacy doesn't apply even just in case of a minor. The right to privacy, therefore, isn't associate absolute right and doesn't apply uniformly to any or all things and every one category of persons. as an example, privacy with reference to a definite category of persons, sort of a person publically authority, affords completely different protection as against non-public people. International Efforts In 1994, a group of 39 prominent legal experts and media representatives, called by the International Commission of Jurists, its Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, and the Spanish Committee of United Nation International Education Fund met for three days in Madrid, Spain. The objectives of the meeting were - - to scrutinize the relationship between the media and judicial independence, - to make principles to help the media and the judiciary develop a relationship that serves both freedom of the expression and the judicial independence. The participants came from Brazil, Sri Lanka, United Kingdom, Sweden, Jordan, Australia, Ghana, France, India, Spain, Germany, Austria, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Switzerland, Senegal, Palestine, Bulgaria, Croatia, and Slovakia. The following are the principles drawn up at the meet. The Madrid Principles on the connection between the Judicial Independence and Media. Freedom of the media, which may be a a part of freedom of expression, is crucial during a democratic society. it's the only responsibility of judges to recognise and provides effect to freedom of the media by applying a basic presumption in their favour and by permitting only such restrictions on freedom of the media which are authorised by the International Covenant in Civil and Political Rights ("International Covenant") and are per precise laws. The media have an obligation to respect the rights of individuals, protected by the International Covenant, and therefore the independence of the judiciary. The Basic Principle 1. Freedom of expression (including freedom of the media) constitutes one in every of the essential foundations of every society which claims to be democratic. it is the function and right of the media to gather and convey information to the final public and to touch upon the administration of justice, including cases before, during and after trial without contravening the presumption of innocence. 2. This principle can only be departed from within the circumstances envisaged within the International Covenant in Civil and Political Rights, as interpreted by the 1984 Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions within the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 3. the right to treat the administration of justice shall not be subject to any special restrictions. Scope of the essential Principle 4. the essential principle doesn't exclude the preservation by law of secrecy during the investigation of crime even where investigation forms part of the judicial process. Secrecy in such circumstances must be thought to be being mainly for the nice thing about persons who are suspected or accused and to preserve the presumption of innocence. It shall not restrict the proper of any such person to talk to the Press information about the investigation of the circumstances being investigated. 5. the basic principle doesn't exclude the holding in camera of proceedings intended to comprehend conciliation or settlement of private cause. 6. the elemental principle doesn't require a right to broadcast live or recorded court proceedings. Where this can be often permitted, the basic principle shall remain applicable. Restrictions Any restriction of the essential principle must be strictly prescribed by law. Where any such law confers a disposition or power, that discretion or power must be exercised only by a judge. Where a judge includes an influence to limit the essential principle and is contemplating the exercise of that power, the media (as well because the other person affected) shall have the proper to be heard for the aim of objecting to the exercise of that power and, if exercised, a right of appeal. Laws may authorise restrictions of the essential principle to that extent necessary during a democratic society for the protection of the minors and of members of other groups in need of special protection. Laws may restrict the essential principle in relevance criminal proceedings within the interest of the administration of justice to the extent necessary during a democratic society. (a) for the prevention of great prejudice to a defendant (b) for the prevention of great harm to or improper pressure being placed upon a witness, a member of a jury, or a victim. Where a restriction of the essential principle is sought on the underside of national security, this might not jeopardise the right of the parties, including the rights of the defence. The defence and also the media shall have the proper to the most effective extent possible tin understanding the grounds on which the restriction is sought (subject, if necessary, to a obligation of confidentiality if the restriction is imposed) and shall have the right to contest this restriction. In civil proceedings, restrictions of the basic principle could even be imposed if authorised by law to the extent necessary in an exceedingly democratic society to prevent serious harm to the legitimate interest of a non-public party. No restriction shall be imposed in any arbitrary or discriminatory manner. No restriction shall be inflicted except strictly to the minimum extent and for the minimum time necessary to understand its purpose, and no restriction shall be imposed if a more limited restriction would be likely to realize that purpose. The burden of proof shall rest on the party requesting the restrictions mentioned

155 views
WhatsApp Image 2020-10-08 at 12.17.40 AM
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2020 By Lawlytical. All rights reserved.