E-Paper
EC was split over move to seek gag order on media
The disagreements surfaced days after the Supreme Court on Monday called “far-fetched” an EC plea before the Madras high court for restraining media from reporting oral observations of the judges
There were disagreements within the Election Commission of India (EC) over its move to seek a gag on media reportage of the Madras high court’s oral observations on April 26 blaming the poll body singularly for the second Covid-19 wave in the country, people aware of the matter said.
One of the persons said disagreements also included over moving the Supreme Court against the remarks. The disagreements surfaced days after the Supreme Court on Monday called “far-fetched” an EC plea before the Madras high court for restraining media from reporting oral observations of the judges. The judges also said officials of the poll body should probably be tried on murder charges for allowing political parties to hold massive rallies without following Covid-19 norms.
The EC opted to seek a gag order even as the differing opinions emerged at the poll body’s meetings, the persons said and added the decision was not unanimous.
The poll body comprises chief election commissioner Sushil Chandra and commissioner Rajiv Kumar. The post of the second election commissioner has been vacant since Sunil Arora retired in April.
In a statement on Wednesday, the EC maintained the commission always has appropriate deliberations before any decisions are taken while expressing its commitment to free media. “In the context of involvement of media, the Commission wishes to clarify that it stands sincerely committed to its faith in free media. The Commission, as a whole and each one of its members, recognises the positive role played by media in the conduct of all elections in the past and present and in strengthening electoral democracy in the country,” it said.
The EC said it was unanimous that before the Supreme Court there should not be any prayer for restriction on media reporting.
Also Read | SC nixes Maratha reservation, no review of 50% ceiling on quota
A gag on the media was not part of the EC’s prayer before the Supreme Court, where the poll body said judges should use “temperate language” and not blame it for something which was not within their domain. The EC argued it does not take over the governance during the election and issues directions and guidelines that the states are bound to follow.
The Supreme Court asked the EC to take the observations by the high court in the right spirit. It told EC that the high courts were also a constitutional body and that the Supreme Court will not demoralise their judges by issuing any kind of restraint on their process of judicial determination.
The Supreme Court reserved its order on the EC’s appeal against the observations and indicated that a judgment will be delivered this week.
The EC has faced criticism for conducting an eight-phase long election in West Bengal amid the pandemic and refusing to club the last three phases despite a surge in infections.
In the statement, the EC said it recognises the media’s role in ensuring transparency in the poll processes. “The Commission very specially recognises media’s role in enhancing effectiveness of election management and in reinforcing transparency from the very beginning of election process till the end, including transparent coverage during all processes, campaigning and from polling station level to counting. EC’s approach on the collaboration with media is that of a natural ally and remains unchanged.”
The Supreme Court on Monday also said it was not in the favour of putting fetters on judges’ remarks or their media reportage. It said high courts must get “complete freedom” to decide issues before them, and that the “media is a very important and powerful watchdog of the judicial processes”.
The high court on April 26 made the remarks against EC during a hearing of a writ petition seeking a direction for safety measures and fairness during vote counting in Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency.
