Indian Express editorial - Lift the gag on the Sohrabuddin case
The gag order by a
special CBI court in Mumbai, restraining the media from publishing proceedings
of the trial in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh alleged fake encounter case, is
questionable at best, and undemocratic in fact. It amounts to prior restraint
which curbs not just the freedom of the press but also the citizen’s right to
know. It does so in the name of “security”, without making even a minimally
compelling case for how it is threatened if the media does its job. A public
trial ensures that not only is justice done, but also that it is seen to be
done. In effect, therefore, the court seeks to insulate from public gaze a
matter which it says “appears sensational” — a judicial euphemism, perhaps, for
the fact that the list of accused has featured an array of high-profile
individuals such as ministers and high-ranking police officers of Gujarat,
Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh, including BJP president Amit Shah and Gujarat
anti-terrorism squad chief D.G. Vanzara, both of whom were discharged in
controversial circumstances in 2014 and 2017 respectively.
Ever since the 2005
death in police custody of Sohrabuddin — accused of involvement in a range of
crimes from extortion to terror — and subsequently of his wife Kausarbi and
associate Tulsiram Prajapati in Gujarat, the unfolding of the case has invited
charges of political interference. It is for this reason that it has had an
unusual trajectory: The Supreme Court mandated an inquiry in 2007, with the
investigation to report directly to the court. In 2010, the SC transferred the
case to the CBI. In 2012, after the CBI submitted that witnesses were being
threatened and the trial could not be held in a free and fair manner, the SC
airlifted the case to Mumbai. More recently, controversy broke out over the
death in 2014 of the CBI judge hearing the case, B.H. Loya. An investigation by
this paper has found no evidence of foul play in that particular incident. It
is also true, however, that many unanswered questions persist in the case.
That’s why there is a strong public interest to hear the arguments and
counter-arguments, averments and submissions of the defence and the
prosecution.
The court’s gag order
seems to confirm an ominous pattern. A larger climate of censorship appears to
have infected the courts as well. Just weeks ago, the Allahabad High Court
barred the media from reporting on the 2008 Gorakhpur hate speech case, in
which UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath is the prime accused, saying that
“wrong reporting” has been “causing a lot of embarrassment” to the state.
Earlier, in May, the SC barred the media from publishing or reporting the
orders passed by controversial Calcutta High Court judge, Justice C.S. Karnan,
while sending him to jail for contempt. It would be tragic if the court’s
overreaction then, and its excessive deference to an unproven security threat
now, should cast a shadow on its reputation as an institution that upholds, not
circumscribes, openness and freedoms.
http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/lift-the-gag-order-media-sohrabuddin-sheikh-fake-encounter-case-4962273/
