“Here’s a nation, one of the founding pillars was freedom of speech and freedom of expression. And yet we have imposed upon people restrictions, on what they can say, on what they can think. And the media is the largest proponent of this, crucifying people who say things really quite innocently.”
-Benjamin Carson
In India, trial by media has assumed significant proportions. Some famous criminal cases that would have gone unpunished but for the intervention of media are Priyadarshini Mattoo case, Jessica Lal case, and Nitish Katara murder case.
The media however drew criticism in the reporting of murder of Aarushi Talwar, when it pre-empted the court and reported that her own father Dr. Rajesh Talwar, and possibly her mother Nupur Talwar were involved in her murder. The media has again come in focus in its role in Arushi Murder case. The concept of media trial is not a new concept. Media has been termed as a magic bullet that directly hits the mind of the people. You automatically believe what media show you. ‘Yes! It was her parents who killed Aarushi’, and it was concluded before the final judgment of the court that put a question mark on the social responsibility of the media. In the 2002 Godhra riots, Narendra Modi was accused of killing Muslims in Gujarat. The media declared Narendra Modi as the culprit. Besides in 2014, high court of Gujarat gave clean chit in Godhra riots to our present Prime Minister but, still most of the people believe that he was the mastermind behind 2002’s killing! Henceforth, the reputation, respect and dignity suffer even after you have been proven innocent.
What is Trial by Media?
Trial is essentially a process to be carried out by the courts. The trial by media is definitely an undue interference in the process of justice delivery. Trial is a word which is associated with the process of justice. It is the essential component on any judicial system that the accused should receive a fair trial. Media Trial is basically adjudication by media in cases before or after the verdict of court has become a trend in the present scenario to increase the circulation and TRP of newspapers and news channels.
Media has now reincarnated itself into a ‘public court’ (Janta Adalat) and has started interfering into court proceedings. It completely overlooks the vital gap between an accused and a convict keeping at stake the golden principles of ‘presumption of innocence until proven guilty’ and ‘guilt beyond reasonable doubt’. Now, what we observe is media trial where the media itself does a separate investigation, builds a public opinion against the accused even before the court takes cognizance of the case.
By this way, it prejudices the public and sometimes even judges and as a result the accused, that should be assumed innocent, is presumed as a criminal leaving all his rights and liberty unrepressed. If excessive publicity in the media about a suspect or an accused before trial prejudices a fair trial or results in characterizing him as a person who had indeed committed the crime, it amounts to undue interference with the “administration of justice”, calling for proceedings for contempt of court against the media. Unfortunately, rules designed to regulate journalistic conduct are inadequate to prevent the encroachment of civil rights.
Free Speech v/s Fair Trial
In the criminal justice system, which we have been following, the guilt is to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and the law is governed by senses and not by emotions. While displaying our emotions, the media and the masses forget that it puts tremendous pressure on the judge presiding over the case. How can we expect a fair judgment from a judge who is under such tremendous pressure from all sections of the society? A person is presumed to be innocent unless he is held guilty by the competent court, but here the trend is to declare a person guilty right at the time of arrest. The media is there to report facts or news and raise public issues; it is not there to pass judgments.
Conclusion
Media, as referred to by many as the “eyes and ears of the general public”. It forms the backbone of our society. And a responsible media is expected to take into consideration the reliance entrusted on it by the general public and confidence and faith entrusted whereby common man/public blindly accepts the truth of the news published by media. This actually calls for the existence of a responsible media. While acting as a responsible media, it should follow certain norms in reporting of a crime or any news related to the same, like, maintaining the accuracy of the case and verifying the same before it is reported/published, exercising caution to avoid any opinion which is opinion based, not interfering with the right to privacy and publishing anything based on mere suspicion rather rely on accuracy.