'Awatar' of Emergency Goddess

Hang on, maybe not yet. 10 Janpath Loyalist Former Secretary I & B Navin Chawla is behind the probable Broadcasting Services Regulation Bill, 2006, equal to sugar coated poisonous censorship.

India’s greatest success is the relative stability of its political democracy, surely a rarity in the Third World. But this should not be turned in dictatorial Govt. Majority of the Leftists mainly CPI supported Indira’s emergency, presently helped armed Maoist to remove King of alone Hindu Rastra Nepal and now supporting Naxalites. They accept modernity Kingdom styled in the shape of Gandhi dynasty. Common man believes that even the last wish of hanging person should be fulfilled but last wish of ‘Father of India’ could not be fulfilled. Mahatma Gandhi’s last wish was to wipe out the Congress. Gandhi dynasty still rules to murder Gandhi’s principles.


Next election under Emergency Villain

Is there any institution in this country Sonia Gandhi left untouched? Now Sonia Gandhi is the most divisive figure in the country and she is tearing this country apart. EC sources say Sonia’s strategy is to ensure that Chawla heads the panel during the May 2009 general elections. This is not to say that there is no civil and political liberty. The minds are however not free and hence the people at large live in the mental slavery.

How and who is behind to damage the autonomy of CBI to withdraw Bofors case, Income Tax Authorities to harsh Big B and now of the premier institute AIIMS to remove learned surgeon Dr. Venu Gopal?

Censorship on media again

Emergency era of Indira Congress is again just too reborn through Sonia Congress. Hang on, maybe not yet. Former Secretary I & B Navin Chawla is behind the probable Broadcasting Services Regulation Bill, 2006, equal to sugar coated poisonous censorship. Neither resent I &B Secretary SK Arora and nor not-even-a-year-in-the-seat I&B minister Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi have to do on this Bill which is in the womb of Govt.

Such type of Bill is also in U.S. Recently Federal Communications Commission of the U.S. announced that it would review media ownership rules to address the issue of media consolidation and the impact it has had on diversity of news coverage.

It is a shrouded attempt by the Congress-led coalition government to steamroll legislation through without taking industry stakeholders and others into confidence, thus making a mockery of democratic norms.


What constitutes an individual's privacy?

Take an example of this Bill: "TV channels must not use material relating to a person's personal or private affairs or which invades an individual's privacy unless there is an identifiable public interest reason for the material to be broadcast." Who decides what constitutes an individual's privacy: the government or the regulator? What this means of course is that it's all up for interpretation. It is this scope for interpretation that is the most fearful aspect of this bill as happening on following.


Is Media great dangerous than Terrorism?

Who are secularists? Are President Bush who bowed his knee before late Pope and Christian Sonia who instructed Indian Govt. to announce three days morn on the death of Pope Secularists? What is terrorism and insurgency? Terrorists are brothers and children of Shivraj Patil. Speaker of Parliament Somnath says naxalites are not criminals. Move as you like behind undefined tags.

While justifying the reasonable restrictions, I feel that there should be another provision so that no dictator can take advantage of this provision of the constitution to restrict free flow of information under the cover of reasonable restriction. As happened for POTTA, which was a right step to grab the neck of terrorists but it was misused by Jayalalitha and others.

What make things scary is that the proposed autonomous Broadcast Regulatory Authority of India (Brai) has been given powers that permit it to run amok if interpreted incorrectly by it. Brai's chief executive would be a serving government official of additional secretary's rank, drawing a salary from the government and, naturally, having allegiance to the government.


Limit of freedom

There was an interesting case regarding the limit of freedom in Great Britain.The case was regarding the limit of freedom of an individual. One passenger of a public bus hit the nose of another passenger while moving his hands inside the bus. The injured bus passenger sued the person who hit him in the nose. During the submission, the accused person told the court that he had no intention to hit the nose of the complainant. He was just enjoying his freedom in movement of his limbs that might have affected the complainant. The judgment was clear. The judge said "certainly you have the freedom to move your hands freely either inside the bus or anywhere. But you must remember that your freedom ends where his nose begins,”.


Civil Society should watch Four Pillars

It is for the civil society to constantly watch the four “powers” and take them to task whenever there is injustice, abuse of power, corruption and falsehood. In South Africa they have a beautiful saying: People are people because of other people. Transposed to the context we are concerned with, the proverb is laden with hope. It means that if a few start taking the responsibility to act rightly, even in little ways, their action is bound to ripple and influence others, making the entire world a little more just, humane and peaceful – a return to the primeval and pristine religion: Sanatana Dharma.


United protest necessary against censorship

There is a need of united stand beyond political barriers. Something like what was demonstrated when Indira Gandhi imposed the Emergency and there after her son Rajiv Gandhi government in 1988 had attempted to bring in a piece of legislation to muzzle the media. It may be recalled that the government had rushed the Defamation Bill through the lower house of Parliament in August of that year. In the same way present Govt. has taken profit of the matter of Double profit. It is fact that related Bill has been sent back by the President for reconsideration to the parliament. If Rakhi Sawant and Malika Sherawat feel shame in their shows then it may be possible members of ruling parties, the opposition and the broker-joker Leftist parties don’t pass again the Bill returned by the honorable President.


Ethical Question

This is right that over sensation and the greed to expand stories drift journalists away from responsible journalism. In recent days an ethical question has been raised. Is it ethical to call somebody a killer, a thief or corrupt until the time he or she is convicted by a court? The accused's parents\ lawyers alleged that their children or clients arc often tried by media before they are tried by the court of law. There is logic behind such accusation. Shankaracharya Jayendra Sarswati’s case still not decided by the court but media have aready made culprit to shuch a highest authority of Hinduism. The same happened in the Rahul Mahajn case. Gujarat High Court has said in its judgment, ‘‘it appears that attempt is being made by journalist/human right activist and advocates Teesta Setalvad and Mihir Desai to have a parallel investigation. We do not know how far it is proper but we can state that it is not permissible under law.’’


‘Code of Conduct’

But necessity is for self code of conduct instead of Govt. sponsored terror instrument code of conduct. Fourth Estate should evolve a code for itself to bring the truth to the public, besides reflecting the feelings of the masses. Media is a strong link between the legislature, the executive and the general public.
.
With idealism giving way to opportunism the quality of not only journalists but also politicians and bureaucrats was on the decline. If there is necessity of ‘code of conduct’ for channels there the same is also necessary for others. So beginning of this should be from Super PM, PM, Govt. and the parties who are running the Govt. and supporting the Govt.


By Premendra Agrawal