Delhi Protests: Everyone is a Reporter Under Freedom of Expression, SC Flags Difficulty in Protecting Real Journalists

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday verbally observed that it becomes difficult to demarcate and protect legitimate reporters accredited to credible news organisations who qualify as journalists, when the right to freedom of expression under Article 19 enables every citizen to claim the space of a journalist, while considering a plea alleging harassment, assault and detention of journalists during the October 10 protests in Delhi.

The verbal observation came as a bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi considered pleas alleging harassment and manhandling of women journalists by police personnel during the protests. The Court said the allegations were serious.

“The difficulty is when everyone claims to be a journalist under the right to freedom of expression”, Justice Bagchi remarked. 

The Court also noted the difficulty in drawing clear lines between accredited journalists and others operating in the digital space.

The Court indicated that it would have to consider the different “layers of protection” applicable to accredited journalists and demarcate them from influencers and others.

During the hearing, there were two issues that Senior Advocate Indira Jaisingh apprised the Court of — one where the senior lawyer vehemently submitted that a women journalist she was representing was very badly assaulted by a male Delhi police officer during the October 10-11 protests in Delhi. The senior lawyer also proposed to submit a sealed cover report on the names of several women journalists who have allegedly been subjected to assault and harrasment during the October 10–11 protests.

The Supreme Court noted that these are very serious issues that needed to be examined. It said it would also examine how these cases should be investigated.

“Don’t take coercive action against the woman journalist,” the Court told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre and Delhi police.

She also proposed that a committee be constituted to examine the allegations, preferably comprising former women judges and former IPS officers.

The Court, however, indicated that the present proceedings would be confined to the particular victim referred to in Jaisingh’s petition. 
“We will restrict this case to the particular victim you have mentioned in the petition,” the Court said.

The Court also observed that it would have to strike a balance between the rights of the alleged victims and the concerns raised regarding journalists.

“There are specific allegations against certain police officials. We are examining whether an independent investigation agency needs to investigate,” the Court observed.

Solicitor General of India (SGI) Tushar Mehta submitted that in the present day, “anybody with a phone” can claim to be a journalist. He said some people who proclaim to be freelance journalists are “reel makers”. He said it is difficult for the authorities to determine who is who. He nevertheless submitted that no woman should be subjected to harassment, including women police personnel.

Jaisingh countered that people have a right to work as independent journalists.

The Court also noted that there were four pleas before it concerning alleged attacks on lawyers.

“There are four pleas which deal with attacks on lawyers. We are cognisant of that, and we are issuing a notice to the authorities seeking their response on these four pleas also,” the Court said.

The bench was also apprised that hawkers and taxi drivers had been affected during the protests. In another submission, by Senior Advocate N. Hariharan, counsel appearing for a protester said his client had been beaten up at a police station and was bleeding, and that a pen drive containing a recording of the alleged assault was available.

“Our doors are open for everyone,” the Court said.

The Court confirmed that it was seeking the Union’s response on allegations concerning assaults on protesters, lawyers and journalists. It also took note of a plea by Senior Advocate C.U. Singh seeking the return of camera equipment allegedly seized by the police.

The proceedings form part of a batch of petitions concerning the October 10-11 protests in Delhi. The Court had earlier identified four broad sets of matters before it, including pleas concerning alleged detentions of peaceful protesters, attacks on lawyers and journalists, and alleged non-compliance with its earlier directions concerning restrictions imposed during the protests.