A spirited public movement in Kolkata has forced the West Bengal government to transfer Kolkata’s police commissioner and four other police officers for their role in the Rizwanur Rahman case.
Why does it take a public campaign to get justice for the common man? Is a public campaign possible without media focus? IBNLive readers discussed this with CNN-IBN’s Senior Editor Sagarika Ghose in chat on Thursday. Excepts from the chat:
Kedar: Why are we obsessed with this case? I don’t think anybody cares. It’s not because of apathy but because everyone knows there are many such cases in which victims have not got justice.
Sagarika Ghose: It’s not just this case. Public activism has played a major role in the Jessica Lall case, Priyadarshani Mattoo case and the Mehar Bhargav case.
Biranchi Narayan Acharya: It’s alleged that media activism is aimed at increasing TRP ratings rather genuine national interest. I do not buy such allegations but wanted to know your views as a media person
Sagarika Ghose: Many media groups, certainly us at CNN-IBN, see ourselves performing a public service. Old style socialists hate the fact that ordinary people have an impact on the judicial system; that ordinary people can actually force the courts to come out of their ivory towers and hear the cry for justice. It’s not about TRPs. It’s about our duty as the press. You may be cynical about the media, but trust me there are many of us who still believe in the noble ideals of the fourth estate
Pawan: It is unfortunate that CNN-IBN has not cared to find people who are dangerous to the Indian and world peace. What would be other explanation that you don’t find it right that people like Yasin Malik should be behind bars. Yasin was killer of Indian soldiers and he has become a hero of the Indian media. The media seems to have lost track.
PAGE_BREAK
Sagarika Ghose: Media can only do what it can. The media is not here to fight ideological battles. When citizens take to the streets to demand justice for the dead against high and mighty people and against powerful people, it is the duty of the media to hear the cry of the underdog, to hear the cry of the frog under the plough
Rajamohan: Just stop this unrealistic candle-lighting sitting in AC rooms. Instead get your mike and camera and go to rural India and try to bring some awareness among your so called urban-instant-fame-seeking-elite viewers about how its been a routine reality the rural innocent and poverty ridden women are going through with; at the hands of so called obnoxious upper castes people.
Sagarika Ghose: Yes, It’s time the media took up a justice campaign that is not urban but rural. We did do it to some extent in the case of the Khairlanji killings.
Prakash: A personal question. Are you anti-establishment? If yes, isn’t it against the basic ethics of journalism to be so?
Sagarika Ghose: I, and everybody at CNN-IBN, stand for the underdog, the powerless and the voiceless. We use our social and public power to focus attention on those who are ignored by the mainstream. Journalists can never be the outriders of authority. We are not the chamchas of VIPs. We will always hear the cry of those who are unseen and unheard. We have always done so and we always will.
Ravi: In issues like Riwanur, Best Bakery, the debate is taking the tenor of mob frenzy. I am inclined to believe that an atmosphere is created that accused should be convicted and it is mandatory. Don't you think so?
Sagarika Ghose: That is an important point! I think public activism is important in that it can put pressure on the administration to act and put pressure on the judges but when it comes to actual evidence and actual court proceedings, I think that’s where the public needs to let the court do its work because we do not know what evidence has been placed on record and every citizen is entitled to a free and fair trial. Trial by media is not a good idea at all.
PAGE_BREAK
B Jayachander Rao: I feel that we need a law which prohibits the political interference of the judiciary and police systems in our country. In that case we may not see this kind of delay in cases. Public out cry is good in the democracy, but is not good for the long term, otherwise, people feel that our system is not working properly.
Sagarika Ghose: The point is that our judicial system is hopelessly slow, cases drag on for years, evidence gets buried and witnesses turn hostile. In these circumstances media does play an important role in empowering the victim. Priyadarshani Mattoo's father has gone on record in thanking the media for helping overturn the verdict in his daughter's murder case. I think what the media was able to achieve in the Priyadarshani and Jessica case was truly revolutionary
Tulika and Rahul: Do you agree that the media must help the judiciary rather than provoking the masses to take the law in their hands as it happened in the sting operation against a Delhi schoolteacher?
Sagarika Ghose: The sting operation on the schoolteacher was horrible, terrible. Believe me, we were all very upset about it and spent many hours in our edit meetings asking ourselves to what depths has our profession fallen? I have never liked sting operations and now we are all in the process of creating a set of guidelines for sting operations in our organisations. When sting operations expose corrupt politicians and beggar mafias, they do perform a public good, when they simply trap or frame or violate someone's privacy they are criminal acts.
Manish Sharma: The judiciary is burdened with cases. Thousands of cases are lying to get justice, therefore I think we should not be saying that ‘we have compelled the judiciary to act’
Sagarika Ghose: Let me give you some very shocking statistics. In 1968 our conviction rate was 70 per cent, in 1999, its below 40 per cent, in 2003 its below 35 per cent, at the moment, the conviction rate of our courts is below 30 per cent. Only the poor get convicted in India because they don't have the money to buy themselves rich defence lawyers. Lakhs of cases are pending in our courts and in these circumstances public activism is a small beacon of hope.
PAGE_BREAK
Dennie George: The candles have highlighted only some cases which became high profile just because the media sought to do so. These cases are mostly from the metros and the average TV viewing public chooses to join the bandwagon just out of mass hysteria. The Indian judiciary still waits till eternity to deliver verdicts irrespective of candles or not, and hence it really makes little difference to the victims as justice delayed is justice denied.
Sagarika Ghose: Sure there is an undue focus on urban middle class cases but remember the Bhavri Devi rape case? The Mathura rape case? These were from rural areas and because they were taken up by the media they actually were responsible for changing our colonial and outdated laws and changing the colonial mentality of our jurists!
Ranjan: The media extracts credits for its commissions but it conveniently washes hands of its omissions, like in the Yasin Malik and Bitta Karate cases by saying that media can not fight ideological battle. You are indeed taking ideological positions. The current Candle Light " revolution" is about Rizwanur's mariage to a Hindu Girl. Have you ever explored in how many such cases of inter-religious marriage, the Girl had to change her religion. Why? Why does not a Hindu objects as vehemently to a Hindu-Sikh marriage, (which in any case are very common) as it does to a Hindu Muslim marriage. Why did Muslim leaders got involved in the Rizwanur case? What would have been your reaction if the RSS had supported the girl's family? Remember, Muslim groups opposed the film Bombay because it had a Muslim girl with a Hindu boy. They dread even imagining such a scenario. But they want that the opposite should be test for Indian secularism. What sham and copious secularism.
Sagarika Ghose: It’s my view that marriage is a matter of choice between two individuals. If they choose to marry each other, be they Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, Animist, nudist, they should be allowed to do so and the law of the land (and the press) must stand like a rock of Gibraltar by their side.
PAGE_BREAK
Pranav Gupta: I am a Class IX student. Do you think the media is right in saying convict this person even before the judgment from the court. Shouldn’t they just demand speedy justice?
Sagarika Ghose: That’s a very good question. The CBI has recently said that there is not much evidence against Moninder Singh Pandher (accused in the Nithari serial murders) and that the skeletons found outside his home cannot be linked to him and that you cannot prove murder or sexual assault from bones. So according to the law, there's not much against Pandher. But the media has already painted him as a "cannibal" and the "butcher of Nithari." If the CBI is right, then the media is guilty of terrible character assassination and has ruined his life forever.
Deepak Singh: What about the contempt law in India? It gives judiciary a clean chit. Except for Midday does media have the guts to expose the black sheep in judiciary?
Sagarika Ghose: The contempt law is outdated, and the grounds on which contempt was put on those Midday journalists was ridiculous! The judge said I am not disputing the accuracy of the case but because if you say any thing against ONE Supreme Court judge, you are scandalising the entire judiciary, therefore you are liable for contempt. That’s a very, very dodgy doctrine. The judiciary should not get "scandalised" (such an outdated term!). If there is an investigative report against a judge, the judiciary should see it as a means to cleanse itself for long-term credibility.
Raghu: Why don’t you have a dedicated and exclusive channel reporting the news about rural India from rural India? Are you scared of TRPs? At the end of the day it’s nothing but pure economics. No?
Sagarika Ghose: No reporting from rural areas? Are you serious? Do you watch our channel? Did you see our stories on farmer suicides, a farmer who became a bullock, series on rural Internet, abandoned wives in Punjab, series on rural retail. We cover stories of human beings, whether they are rural or urban. We don't discriminate. Our motto is "nothing that is human is alien." India lives in many different time zones. One time zone does not necessarily delegitimise the other. Sure we do worry about bottomlines, why is that wrong? We are not a charitable organisation, we are a media company and we believe in operating according to standards where all those working for us are given the best compensation we can afford. That doesn’t mean we compromise on our journalism or compromise on our ideals.
B N Acharya: Media activism resulting in public outcry demanding justice is limited to urban middle class. It needs to extend beyond these limits as majority India lives there. Most Indians don’t watch seeing English news channels or read English newspapers. Regional papers, like in Orissa, are owned by politicians. With such hurdles how you all planning to take your movement in awakening people through out the country?
Sagarika Ghose: Media activism in justice cases certainly does have an upper class nature. But as lawyer Kamini Jaiswal says its one cheer for candlelit justice, if not three cheers. It’s not everything, but it’s something.
Nagarajan: If tomorrow Narendra Modi is punished for his role in Gujarat riots, will the media come forward to encourage such candle-lit justice and public pressure.
Sagarika Ghose: Of course the media covers everything that concerns the public. As a small point though, I must point out to you that many many more people died in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots in Delhi (3,000 almost) than in the Gujarat riots of 2002. The only difference between 1984 and 2004 was the presence of the electronic media in the latter case and you can see just what a difference it made!
Abby: If people do candle light marches to India Gate, or garner support through online petitions or communities , wouldn't we risk judiciary as effectively available to the urbane population keeping in mind the fact that the metro population and Internet users are a small measure of Indian population.
Sagarika Ghose: The early freedom fighters were all educated urban people. Nehru, Gandhi, Patel and Radakrishnan were all urban and middle class. That did not mean they did not touch the hearts and minds of a huge number and that their revolution did not spread far and wide. So the beginnings may be small but the effects will grow over time. Candlelit justice is taking place for the moment in cities, maybe in the next generation it will spread beyond urban centers.
Comments
0 comment