Centre's Affidavit In Supreme Court Maintains Silence About Instances Of Communal Reporting Of Tablighi Jamaat Issue

The Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has told the Supreme Court in an affidavit that the media "predominantly stuck to a balanced and neutral perspective" while reporting the news of Tablighi Jamaat followers getting infected with COVID-19 while attending a congregation at Nizamuddin Markaz at New Delhi in March this year.

This statement was made in the affidavit filed by the Ministry in response to a batch of petitions which seek action and penalty against news channels which indulged in communal propaganda against Muslim minority community in the wake of Tablighi Jamaat event.

Curiously, the Centre's affidavit makes no reference to the specific instances of certain media houses communalizing the spread of COVID-19 which are cited by petitioners in the batch case.

Rather, the affidavit states that the media reports of the issue have been "largely factual" and "objective", after referring to reports published by newspapers such as 'The Times of India', 'The Indian Express' and 'The Hindustan Times' and also online portals such as 'The Wire' and 'The Print'.

The affidavit goes on to blame the petitioners by stating they "selectively picked up a few articles/reports appearing in some of the web portals and private fact check portals to create an impression that the media had communalized the issue of Tablighi Jamaat and to create a false narrative about the role of the media".

Notably, the affidavit annexes a report published by web portal 'Newslaundry' titled "Coronavirus and Nizamuddin : TV News returns to bigotry with a bang", which flagged reports of many prominent TV news channels such as 'India TV', 'News 18 India', 'Zee News', 'Republic TV', 'R Bharat', 'Sudarshan TV' as communally sensitive.

The Centre's affidavit maintains a conspicuous silence regarding such reports, despite annexing the Newslaundry article in its entirety. On the other hand, the Centre makes an attempt to discredit the 'Newslaundry' article by stating that it has published another article opining that the Tablighi Jamaat event adversely affect the fight against COVID-19.

The affidavit also cites another news item about police refuting "Amar Ujala" report about Tablighi Jamaat members misbehaving with medical staff. However, the Centre offers no comments about the action proposed against "Amar Ujala" for reporting a baseless claim.

After referring to only the factual and objective media reports about the Tablighi Jamaat issue, the Centre denies that there was communal reporting of the matter.

"...wide ranging views and opinions have been expressed across media platforms on the Tablighi Jamaat issue, which are not communal in nature", says the affidavit filed by Amit Khare, Secretary to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.

Without making any reference to the instances of irresponsible and hateful reporting, the affidavit states :

"It is respectfully submitted that the petition is based on vague assertions based upon certain "fact checking news reports" to contend that the entire media is perpetrating communal harmony and hatred towards one particular community...

The petitioners are seeking a wide-ranging, vague, unrestrained, pretelecast restriction that too based on unverifiable reports".

It is also mentioned in the affidavit that the Centre has blocked 739 URLs and 4 social media accounts which were spreading communal hatred following the Tablighi Jamaat event.

Yesterday, the Supreme Court expressed serious disappointment with the affidavit. 

"We are not satisfied with your affidavit. We had asked you to tell us what have you done under the Cable TV Act? There is no whisper about that in the affidavit. We must tell you that we are disappointed with the Union's affidavit in these matters", the Chief Justice of India, S A Bobde, told the Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta.

It may be noted this affidavit was filed by the Centre after the top court slammed the first affidavit filed in the matter as "extremely evasive and brazenly short of details".

Expressing strong displeasure at the second affidavit as well, the CJI told the Solicitor General:

"The first affidaivt was not satisfactory. Even in the changed affidavit, there is no mention about the action under Cable TV Act. There is no mention about the present legal regime in the present affidavit and also about the applicability of Cable TV Act to controlling electronic media".

Recently, another bench of the Supreme Court had also criticized the Centre for not keeping a watch on the contents of the 'UPSC Jihad' show of Sudarshan TV, after it allowed its telecast on the condition to comply with the Program Code.

"The Programme would have been over by now if the Court had not intervened", Justice D Y Chandrachud had orally remarked after staying the telecast of the show on the prima facie observation that "the object, intent and purpose of the program is to vilify the Muslim community".

In August, a division bench of the Bombay High Court had criticized the manner in which the certain media outlets reported the Tablighi Jamaat event.

"There was big propaganda in print media and electronic media against the foreigners who had come to Markaz Delhi and an attempt was made to create a picture that these foreigners were responsible for spreading COVID-19 virus in India. There was virtually persecution against these foreigners. The material of the present matter shows that the propaganda against the so called religious activity was unwarranted", the High Court observed while quashing FIRS against foreign nationals who had attended the Markaz event.

Click here to read/download the affidavit of Centre filed in the Tablighi Jamaat case