The Supreme Court today set aside the central government’s refusal to renew the broadcasting licence of Malayalam news channel MediaOne.
The government had alleged “national security” concerns while refusing to renew the channel’s licence. But the apex court today said “national security claims cannot be made on the basis of thin air”, as reported by Bar and Bench.
MediaOne went off the air in January 2022 when the ministry of information and broadcasting refused to renew its licence. The ministry of home affairs also refused to renew uplinking permissions, citing “national security”. In March last year, the Kerala High Court dismissed MediaOne’s appeal and upheld the telecast ban. Later that month, the Supreme Court passed an interim order permitting its transmission.
Importantly, in June, the central government told the apex court it could not disclose the reasons for the ban, but offered to provide relevant files in a “sealed cover”.
According to Livelaw, the Supreme Court said today: “The sealed cover procedure adopted has rendered the rights of the petitioner as a dry parchment and the procedural guarantees to the petitioners have been rendered otiose.”
The bench also said the government was “using the plea of national security to deny the rights of the citizens” which is “incompatible with the rule of law”.
The home ministry had allegedly claimed MediaOne was “anti-national” due to the channel’s “programmes and remarks” on the Citizenship Amendment Act, the National Register of Citizens, the Unlaw Activities Prevention Act and others. The bench said, “Critical views of the media cannot be termed anti-establishment.”
#SupremeCourt: #MediaOneBAN
— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) April 5, 2023
1. we are of the opinion that public immunity proceedings are less restrictive means to safeguard public interest compared to sealed cover
2. critical views of media one cannot be termed anti establishment and use of this term means that press must…
It should be noted that in March 2020, MediaOne was prohibited from telecasting for 48 hours for being “critical towards Delhi police and RSS” in its reportage on the Delhi riots.
This isn’t the first time the apex court has been critical of the central government’s affinity towards “sealed covers”. On March 20, 2023, CJI Chandrachud described sealed covers as “fundamentally contrary to the judicial process”. But how did sealed covers become so widespread in the first place? Read Newslaundry’s report here.
Newslaundry is a reader-supported, ad-free, independent news outlet based out of New Delhi. Support their journalism, here.
