The Second Judiciary?? by Simi Sunny

Last summer when the Aarushi Talwar twin murders took place, the whole nation was glued to the news channels. As the drama unfolded, the media and the police transcended even the possible scope of imagination to guess the culprit and introduced their own conspiracy theories. They reported everything from the family’s life style, Aarushi’s habits, to her relationship with her friends. The channels went berserk with the coverage of the case. TRPs sky-rocketed, for it provided all the masala of a saas-bahu soap. The most interesting part was the conspiracy theories of each channel. The state of the marriages of Talwars and Durranis became ‘breaking news’. The media did not even spare the victim and spun stories of a relationship between Aarushi and the servant, Hemraj. The case became disturbing example of to what extent a sensation hungry media can go to cater to the people’s thirst for voyeurism and curiosity. The recent Ruchika Girhotra molestation case was another example of media’s growing obsession with revealing the truth. SP Rathore’s images flashed across channels portraying him as the dangerous devil.

The media has for years gloated over its role in the Jessica Lall and the Priyadarshini Mattoo case. Media activism was indeed the reason for the justice being delivered in these cases. It was the support of the media which turned the tide especially when the suspects belonged to influential families like the son of a former cabinet member and a police officer respectively. The media exposed the lapses in the prosecution and influenced the public to rise up against the court’s decision.

The trial by media has begun a tug of war between two conflicting principles –free press and the free trial. The phenomenon has created a gulf between the two leading public institutions-the media and the judiciary. According to the 17^th Law Commission there are certain restrictions placed on the Freedom of Press granted by Article 19(1)a. It states that material which has a prejudicial impact on the suspects, accused, witnesses and even judges and in general the administration of justice should not be allowed to be published. Such a report can tend to influence or pressurize the judge in delivering prejudiced judgment. It also tends to hurt the position of both the defense and the prosecution.

Implications of a media trial were most obvious in the Noida twin murder case. As Dr.Talwar walked out of the Dasna Jail media realized it had indeed gone overboard with allegations and ended up apologizing for character assassination and defamation. Media which hails judicial activism seeks exemption when it comes to them. It takes up the role of the prosecutor and passes the verdict with such a propaganda-like zeal that the confused nation which listens to every twist and turn accepts it as the ultimate truth. We don’t even try to question the position taken by the media just to be part of the righteous public. Television coverage today raises doubts about the right of an accused to dodge the stigma of conviction even before the trial. It serves what interests the public and not what is public interest.

The media has a responsibility towards the society and it needs to ensure that punishment is delivered to the culprits and the innocents acquitted. But in the rush for business profits and high TRPs, it has failed to rein in its frenzied and irresponsible reporting. It’s time the media accept accountability in its reporting and abide by the ethics of journalism.