Form of words:
New Delhi: Advocating freedom of the press in a modern democracy, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said that protection of “journalistic sources” is one of the basic conditions of the media’s right to freedom of expression.
In your order a . directing the constitution of technical Committee Allegedly To “Fully Investigate” Pegasus snooping controversy, a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana weighed the role of media as an “important pillar of democracy”.
The court said that without protection, sources could be prevented from assisting journalists in informing the public on matters of public interest, and that this would be an “assault” on the media’s role as a “critical public watchdog”. Security of sources is an “important and necessary consequence” of media freedom.
“With regard to the importance of protection of journalistic sources for the freedom of the press in a democratic society and the possible chilling effect of espionage techniques, the function of this court in the present case, where there are some serious allegations of violation of the rights of citizens, raised the country is of great importance,” said the judgment, which comprehensively and dealt with the individual’s right to privacy and the circumstances under which it may be violated.
The court even noted that the freedom of the press is “to some extent concerned with privacy concerns”, and in this light that it is “to determine the truth and to take reason to get to the bottom of the allegations”. is forced”. NS Petitions On the use of Pegasus software.
The petitioners in the case have alleged that the Israeli-origin malware primarily targeted a section of people who are seen as outspoken critics of the central government or its policies.
This is the first time that the apex court has acknowledged the role of sources in the field of journalism. Sources may include individuals or citizens who come forward and provide information to the media about any wrongdoing or illegal acts within a state or non-state entity. In many cases, such people can also be whistleblowers.
However, the court felt that incidents such as surveillance and the knowledge that someone is at risk of being spied on could have a “chilling effect on freedom of expression”.
It states that such knowledge may affect the way a person exercises his or her rights, and that such scenario may result in “self-censorship”, which is the urge to provide accurate and reliable information. May weaken the power of the press. “This is a matter of particular concern when it relates to the freedom of the press, which is an important pillar of democracy,” the bench said.
‘Privacy is sacred’
The bench referred to the apex court’s 2020. referred to Holocaust In the Anuradha Bhasin case, where the issue of disconnection of 4G services in Kashmir was settled after the abrogation of Article 370. In that judgment, the apex court had highlighted the importance of freedom of the press, saying “journalists must be adjusted in reporting and there is no justification to allow the sword of Damocles to hang on the press indefinitely”.
Apart from journalists, the court said that for citizens, their privacy is sacrosanct. Technology has become a tool to upgrade life, but at the same time, it has the potential to infringe on a person’s personal space.
And this right, the court said, is directly infringed when there is surveillance or espionage by the state or any outside agency.
If done by the state, it should be justified on constitutional grounds. “This court is aware of the interest of the state to ensure that life and liberty are protected and this must be balanced,” the bench said.
In today’s world, it is accepted that the information gathered by intelligence agencies through surveillance is essential to the fight against violence and terror, and that access to this information can interfere with an individual’s right to privacy. need may arise.
However, this intervention should be done only when it is absolutely necessary, and proportionate to the purpose of protecting national security or interests, the court said.
“The consideration for the use of such alleged technology must be evidence-based. In a democratic country governed by the rule of law, indiscriminate spying on persons shall not be permitted under the Constitution, except by adequate statutory safeguards, by following procedure established by law.” may be,” the bench said.
(Edited by Polomi Banerjee)
Read also: Retired SC judge Ravindran, from failing in law exam to Lodha panel on cricket and now Pegasus probe
subscribe our channel youtube And Wire
Why is the news media in crisis and how can you fix it?
India needs free, unbiased, non-hyphenated and questionable journalism even more as it is facing many crises.
But the news media itself is in trouble. There have been brutal layoffs and pay-cuts. The best of journalism are shrinking, yielding to raw prime-time spectacle.
ThePrint has the best young journalists, columnists and editors to work for it. Smart and thinking people like you will have to pay a price to maintain this quality of journalism. Whether you live in India or abroad, you can Here.