Ban on Malayalam TV channel ‘MediaOne’ raises too many questions about national security

When the Kerala High Court, on Tuesday, February 8, dismissed the plea filed by Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited and upheld the ban on Malayalam television channel MediaOne TV, it set a dubious and dangerous precedent, say experts. Several investors in the media outlet are said to be members of the Jamaat-e-Islami.

The court took the decision after perusing official notings submitted in a sealed cover. The single judge bench concurred with the Government that in matters of national security, principles of jurisprudence need not apply.

The court said that based on inputs from various intelligence agencies, the Union Home Ministry found that security clearance should not be renewed for the channel. Passing the order, the judge said that there were inputs that justified the decision.

The single judge bench refused to accept the plea that security clearance by the Home Ministry was needed while applying for a license to uplink and not for renewals. Nor did the court entertain the plea that the order would render several hundred employees unemployed.

Significantly, when a delegation of Members of Parliament from Kerala called on the Information & Broadcasting Minister Anurag Singh Thakur to lift the ban, the minister pleaded helplessness. His ministry, he held, had no role to play and that the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) would know the reasons. When the MPs thereafter met Home Minister Amit Shah in Parliament, he acknowledged that he had received their letter and had passed it on to the officials for their opinion.

Curiously, the TV channel’s license came up for renewal in the middle of last year. The channel applied for renewal three months before the expiry. There was radio silence from the Government for the next eight months till it communicated the decision to revoke the license.

The curious sequence of events raises several questions. At which point did the channel compromise national security, before or after applying for renewal? Why wasn’t the channel served with a show cause notice and given an opportunity to be heard before the license was revoked? Even more importantly, had there been a serious breach of national security, why was no action taken by a government which slaps sedition cases and uses the draconian UAPA at the drop of a hat?

Any activity that is prejudicial to national security should surely lead to prosecution and the evidence made public. What kind of a national security breach can be made by a TV channel? TV channels work in the public glare and there are several channels which are guilty of spreading hate speech and fake news against which MHA or the I & B Ministry have taken no action. That is why it was shocking when the Union government barred the telecast of the channel on January 31. Within hours of MediaOne TV going off air, the channel challenged the move in the Kerala High Court, which put the order on hold for two days.

The interim stay was on February 2 and was extended till February 7. In its plea, the channel had stated that it was not involved in any anti-national activity warranting such a bar on its operations.

MediaOne TV along with Malayalam news channel Asianet was earlier suspended for 48 hours over their coverage of the Delhi riots in 2020. The official order had then accused the channel of highlighting attacks on places of worship and the coverage being ‘biased’ towards a particular community”.

Law experts believe that Indian courts have the responsibility to scrutinize executive action and give speaking orders, not accept every executive plea on the ground of national security.

“Deeply troubling” commented The Indian Express in an editorial on Thursday, adding that it is worrying that the state refuses to justify its action before the court on grounds of national security; and even more worrying when the court refuses to question the executive.

The channel will undoubtedly go in appeal but unless there is an interim stay or unless the issue is decided expeditiously, it would be impossible to restore the channel and employment to its employees; all because the Government refuses to spell out the specific breach and justify the revocation of the license.

It promises to be a test case for media freedom.

(This article was first published in National Herald on Sunday)