FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS GRANTED TO MEDIA UNDER

CONSTRUCTION OF INDIA

Introduction

The media, in its indispensable capacity, assumes a pivotal role within the framework of a
democratic society, as it diligently upholds the government's accountability, disseminates
pertinent information to the citizenry, and fervently advocates for the preservation of freedom
of expression. The esteemed Constitution of India, in its unwavering commitment to
upholding justice and safeguarding the principles of democracy, duly ensures the protection
of fundamental rights bestowed upon the media. These rights, which are inscribed in the
constitution, include the sacred right to free speech and expression, the necessary right to
receive knowledge, and the priceless right to publish and distribute information1.

The Indian Constitution, an extraordinary instrument that was enacted on January 26, 1950,
bestows upon its citizens a formidable structure of fundamental rights. The rights mentioned
above are critical for protecting the fundamental freedoms of individuals, and their
importance in ensuring the efficient functioning of a prosperous democratic society cannot be
exaggerated. Within the realm of these enumerated rights, it is unequivocally evident that the
right to freedom of speech and expression assumes a paramount position, thereby serving as
the fundamental bedrock upon which the edifice of media freedom is constructed. In the
present discourse, we shall embark upon a comprehensive and meticulous examination of the
inherent entitlements bestowed upon the media fraternity as enshrined within the esteemed
Constitution of India.

The Framework of Fundamental Rights

Part III of the Indian Constitution lists all of the essential rights that are available to all Indian
citizens. The media, being recognized as the Fourth Estate, assumes a crucial and
indispensable function in safeguarding and preserving the aforementioned rights. The
fundamental rights that are of particular relevance to the media encompass the following:

1
Shah, Nishant. "Media Ownership and Concentration in India: The Need for Cross-media Restrictions."
Journal of International Communication, Vol. 20, No. 2, 2014, pp. 213-230. (Accessed on October 28, 2023)
https://paranjoy.in/article/india-needs-cross-media-restrictions
 1. Article 19(1)(a): The cornerstone of media freedom is the right to free speech and
expression. The aforementioned provision confers upon media entities the authority to
disseminate, scrutinize, and denounce without any form of suppression or limitation.
Notwithstanding, it is imperative to acknowledge that the aforementioned freedom,
while inherently valuable, is not without limitations and can be subject to justifiable
restrictions in the interest of maintaining public order, preventing defamation,
discouraging incitement to violence, and other valid reasons.
2. Article 19(1)(b): The freedom to assemble peacefully and without the use of force is a
fundamental right that allows media outlets and journalists to report on events,
conduct interviews, and get news unhindered.
3. Article 19(1)(c): The freedom to organize organizations or unions gives media
professionals the ability to stand up for press freedom and defend their interests.
4. Right to Information (Article 19(1)(a) and Article 21): The aforementioned right is a
derivative of the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. The
aforementioned provision facilitates the ability of journalists to obtain access to
government information, thereby promoting and upholding principles of transparency
and accountability.
5. Article 21: Protection of Life and Personal Liberty- The paramount importance lies in
safeguarding the safety and security of journalists, as it is crucial to uphold the
unimpeded functioning of the media. It is the responsibility of the state to protect the
lives and liberties of persons working in the media.

Criticisms and Challenges

In light of the provisions set forth in the Indian Constitution, it is imperative to acknowledge
the existence of various challenges and critiques that necessitate due consideration and
resolution.

1. Overreach of the State:

 Misuse of limitation provisions: One of the main issues facing India's media freedom
is the improper application of the limitation provisions outlined in Article 19(2) of the
Constitution. The aforementioned provisions, namely 'public order,' 'security of the
state,' and 'defamation,' are frequently invoked as grounds for justifying the restriction
of freedom of speech and expression2. The aforementioned misapplication may
2
Dr. Mohd Aftab and Dr. Mazar Ali Shah. "Media and Democracy in India: A Historical Perspective." Media
Asia, Vol. 41, No. 1-2, 2014, pp. 94-97. (Accessed on October 28, 2023)
 potentially lead to a phenomenon wherein media establishments and journalists
engage in self-imposed restrictions on their own content, due to apprehension
regarding potential legal ramifications.
 Misuse of Sedition Laws: It is well known that the antiquated Indian Penal Code's
Section 124A has been abused to stifle dissident voices in the media. It has come to
our attention that certain individuals, namely journalists and activists, have been
subjected to charges of sedition on the sole basis of engaging in the act of criticizing
the government or expressing their personal viewpoints. The aforementioned
statement not only has the effect of impeding the exercise of free speech, but also
serves to erode the fundamental tenets upon which democracy is built.
2. Lack of Whistleblower Protection:
 Stifling Effect on Investigative Journalism: The lack of comprehensive whistleblower
protection legislation has a stifling effect on investigative journalism. In the absence
of adequate provisions to protect individuals who disclose instances of corruption or
misconduct, prospective whistleblowers are understandably reluctant to step forward,
as they harbor concerns regarding potential reprisals and the potential imposition of
legal ramifications. The aforementioned circumstance impedes the media's capacity to
fulfill its duty of holding those in positions of authority responsible for their actions.
3. Media Ownership and Pluralism:
 Concentration of Media Ownership: The concentration of media ownership within a
small number of influential companies or people is a significant cause for worry. The
aforementioned phenomenon possesses the capacity to undermine the autonomy of
media establishments. In instances where media establishments are under the
ownership of entities with vested interests in diverse industries, there exists the
possibility for said ownership to exert influence upon their editorial stance and
reporting. Consequently, this influence may result in the manifestation of bias and a
diminished level of objectivity.
 The potential consequences of a lack of diversity and pluralism in the media regarding
the democratic process should not be underestimated. The restriction mentioned
above restricts the range of visual and auditory expressions and perspectives that are
available to the general public. As a result, their ability to make informed decisions is
hindered. It is contended that the maintenance and welfare of a democratic society are

https://www.allstudyjournal.com/article/613/3-3-59-497.pdf
 fundamentally dependent on the existence of a pluralistic media landscape. There is
an argument that the consolidation of media ownership may hinder the previously
mentioned goal.
4. Cybersecurity and Privacy issues:
 Data Protection and Surveillance: The emergence of the digital age has given rise to
concerns regarding surveillance and data protection. The existing data protection
legislation in India is marked by a significant lack of rigorous standards, which
consequently renders journalists and their sources susceptible to potential risks. The
broad jurisdiction granted to governmental bodies concerning online surveillance
possesses the capacity to dissuade individuals from engaging in investigative
journalism and from exercising their right to free expression.
 The safeguarding of sources is of utmost importance in the journalistic profession, as
it enables journalists to unearth and bring to light matters of public significance.
Notwithstanding, the potentiality of surveillance and data breaches poses a significant
hazard to the safeguarding of sources, thereby potentially engendering a dearth of
transparency and accountability within both governmental and private domains.
5. Defamation Laws:
 Potential Suppression of Criticism: The presence of stringent defamation laws within
the jurisdiction of India may potentially exert a notable chilling effect on the practice
of investigative reporting and the expression of critical viewpoints. The prospect of
costly and protracted legal battles usually discourages journalists and media
organizations from engaging in strong reporting, especially when scrutinizing
powerful persons or businesses.

Court Interpretations: Molding Rights for the Media

In India, judicial interpretations are crucial in defining and forming the constitutional rights
of the media. Through a series of consequential judgments, the esteemed Indian judiciary,
particularly the Supreme Court, has undertaken a pivotal role in elucidating the scope and
limitations of said rights. An extensive study of some of these important court cases and the
Supreme Court of India's changing interpretations is given in this section.

1. Sakal Papers Ltd. vs. Union of India 3: This seminal case challenged the legality of the
Newsprint Control Order and the Press (Control of Supplies) Acts. In the

3
(1962)
 aforementioned ruling, the Supreme Court has affirmed the lack of constitutionality
pertaining to governmental restrictions on the dimensions and pagination of
newspapers, while placing significant emphasis on the intrinsic worth of the freedom
of the press.
2. Romesh Thapar vs. State of Madras4: This case represents one of the most important
and early rulings in the history of press freedom. According to the Supreme Court's
ruling, press freedom is included under Article 19(1)(a) freedom of speech and
expression. It established a significant precedent for press freedom.
3. Bennett Coleman & Co. vs. Union of India5:The present matter concerns the
appointment of judges and is widely recognized as the "First Judges Case." The
aforementioned ruling pertained to the paramount issue of the judiciary's autonomy, a
vital component in safeguarding the unfettered exercise of media liberty and
facilitating its functioning within the confines of a democratic society.
4. Brij Bhushan v. State of Delhi6: This case helped to define the parameters of press
freedom. It addressed limitations on the right to free speech and expression and
established guidelines for appropriate limitations.
5. Indian Express Newspapers vs. Union of India 7: The Supreme Court discussed
newspaper pre-censorship in this case. It maintained that pre-censorship is an
infringement on press freedom and stressed the need of media self-regulation.
6. Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. vs. SEBI 8:The present matter has drawn
considerable scrutiny to the role of the media as a vigilant overseer. The Supreme
Court, in its affirmation, acknowledged and upheld the constitutional right of the press
to cover matters of public interest, emphasizing that the dissemination of such
material is not subject to legal constraints or encumbered by technical legal language.
The decision in question has served to fortify the media's role as staunch advocates
for both accountability and transparency.
7. Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India9:The present matter holds significant implications
with regard to the fundamental right of freedom of speech and the dissemination of
online content. The paramount importance lies in the vigorous defense of online free
speech and expression subsequent to the pronouncement of the Supreme Court,
4
(1950)
5
(1973)
6
(1950)
7
(1985)
8
(2012)
9
(2015)
 wherein it rendered Section 66A of the Information Technology Act as
unconstitutional10.

These cases demonstrate the variety of court judgments and interpretations that have
substantially affected and defined the constitutional rights of the Indian media. These
decisions reflect the Supreme Court's commitment to defending press and speech freedoms
while noting that these rights are not absolute and must be balanced against other
constitutional obligations. These decisions continue to be important references for Indian
constitutional and media law concerns.

Analysis

A democracy cannot exist without the basic rights to the media guaranteed by the Indian
Constitution. But in recent years, there have been worries that these rights are being
diminished.

One point for concern is the increased use of sedition laws to silence dissident voices in the
media. Sedition is defined as any act or endeavour that promotes hatred or dissatisfaction
with the government. Nonetheless, using the imprecise phrase of sedition, the government
has punished journalists and media outlets for reporting sensitive themes. Another source of
concern is the growing trend of internet censorship. Using a variety of legal means, the
government has restricted websites and social media accounts that broadcast critical
information. Furthermore, the government has implemented new restrictions mandating
social media businesses to remove any content deemed "harmful" or "unlawful." These
incidents have sparked concerns about the future of India's journalistic freedom. It is
important to remember that the media is not the only entity that enjoys the fundamental rights
provided to it. These rights are necessary for the maintenance of democracy and public access
to information. A democracy cannot exist without the basic rights to the media guaranteed by
the Indian Constitution. In order to defend these rights and make sure that the media may
operate freely and independently, the government and the court must fulfill their respective
roles.

Recommendations

10
Dr. Meenu Sharma. "Whistleblowers and Corruption in India: A Critical Analysis." Research Journal of
Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 4, April 2022, pp. 250-253. (Accessed on October 28, 2023)
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359815940_Whistleblowers_and_Corruption_in_India_A_Critical_An
alysis
To safeguard the fundamental rights endowed with the media by the Constitution of India, the
subsequent suggestions are put forth:

 Sedition laws ought to be repealed or amended by the government in order to prevent

their exploitation for the suppression of critical media voices.
 It is vital that the government halt the practice of using internet censorship to hinder
critical material on social media platforms and websites.
 New legislation should be enacted to protect the public's right to be informed and the
freedom of the press.
 The judiciary should actively participate in safeguarding the fundamental rights
bestowed upon the media by upholding the Constitution and nullifying legislation that
infringes upon said rights.

Conclusion

The Constitution of India, which guarantees freedom of the media, establishes a

comprehensive framework of fundamental rights, including freedom of speech and
expression. Nevertheless, safeguarding these rights against infringements carried out by
governmental and non-governmental organizations presents the actual challenge. Confronting
these challenges is crucial for the preservation of a vibrant and independent fourth estate in
India and the protection of the media's fundamental rights. In order to uphold media freedom
and support the media's crucial function as a check on authority in the largest democracy
worldwide, it is imperative to implement measures such as safeguards for whistle-blowers,
reforms to digital privacy legislation, and a revaluation of defamation policies.

References
Books and Articles:

 Constitution of India
 Shah, Nishant. "Media Ownership and Concentration in India: The Need for Cross-
media Restrictions." Journal of International Communication, Vol. 20, No. 2, 2014,
pp. 213-230. (Accessed on October 28, 2023) https://paranjoy.in/article/india-needs-
cross-media-restrictions
 Dr. Mohd Aftab and Dr. Mazar Ali Shah. "Media and Democracy in India: A
Historical Perspective." Media Asia, Vol. 41, No. 1-2, 2014, pp. 94-97. (Accessed on
October 28, 2023) https://www.allstudyjournal.com/article/613/3-3-59-497.pdf
 Dr. Meenu Sharma. "Whistleblowers and Corruption in India: A Critical Analysis."
Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 4, April 2022, pp.
250-253. (Accessed on October 28, 2023)
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359815940_Whistleblowers_and_Corruptio
n_in_India_A_Critical_Analysis

Legal Cases:

 Sakal Papers Ltd. v. Union of India (1962) 3 SCR 842

 Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras (1950) SCR 594
 Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India (1973) 2 SCC 788
 Brij Bhushan v. State of Delhi (1950) SCR 605
 Indian Express Newspapers v. Union of India (1985) 1 SCC 641
 Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. v. SEBI (2012) 10 SCC 603
 Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1