Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection to Editors Guild Members Over Manipur Report
The Supreme Court has granted interim protection to four members of the Editors Guild of India (EGI) in light of FIRs lodged by the Manipur police. These FIRs were registered in response to a fact-finding report published by the EGI concerning the ethnic violence in the northeastern state. The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, issued the order and has slated the next hearing for the upcoming Monday.
The EGI’s plea was urgently mentioned before the bench by Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, who highlighted the pressing nature of the case, given that two FIRs had been registered against the fact-finding team members. The allegations in the FIRs claim that their report “promoted enmity.” Divan emphasized the gravity of the situation, stating,
“We are here seeking emergent directions under Article 32 and I will show how. Editor’s guild of India appointed a fact-finding committee. They went to Manipur and made a report and concluded that local news reports were biased.”
The report in question, a comprehensive 24-page document, was released on September 2. The fact-finding team had visited Manipur from August 7 to 10 to assess the media reportage in the state. The FIRs, based on complaints, described the report as
“false, fabricated and sponsored.”
During the hearing, Divan pointed out an error in the report that had been rectified on September 3, a day after its initial publication. He expressed the Guild’s concerns, stating,
“The report is dated September 2, 2023, and an error was corrected on September 3. FIR says report promotes enmity and that it is false etc. We are apprehending the coercive machinery. Please see our serious concern.”
Furthermore, Divan highlighted that the Chief Minister of Manipur had made allegations against the EGI in a press conference, even suggesting that the
“EGI has stoked provocative statements.”
This statement by the Chief Minister was presented as an additional factor for the Court’s consideration.
Initially, the bench considered granting limited protection, suggesting that the petitioners approach the High Court. However, given the circumstances and the Chief Minister’s remarks, the bench decided to issue a notice on the petition and extend interim protection to the EGI members.
This development underscores the challenges faced by journalists and media bodies in reporting sensitive issues and the role of the judiciary in safeguarding their rights.