The Madras High Court says broadcast media should be controlled through statutory body

The Madras High Court Bench has asked Centre to explain why there is no statutory body to improve broadcasting companies whereas newspapers and news agencies are controlled through Press Council Act 1978.

Presently the self regulatory body BCCC, constituted by the Indian Broadcasters’ Association, entertains complaints from the viewers.

Justice N. Kirubakaran has asked for a written reply from Additional Solicitor General P. Wilson by October 15. The court was hearing a petition by a Madurai lawyer against staging an “obscene” performance during IPL inaugural in Chennai.

An FIR was already lodged on complaint of Petitioner K Jebakumar, a Madurai-based lawyer, by the Chennai Police but scope of the case was expanded by the judge to television content regulation in public interest. Petitioner K Jebakumar had asked for a direction to the DGP so the case could be registered on the basis of his complaint dated April 4.

The Additional Solicitor General argued that broadcast media was governed by News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA), formed by News Broadcasters’ Association, and headed by former Chief Justice of India, J.S. Verma. It is a self regulatory body. The BCCC is another self-regulatory body constituted by the Indian Broadcasters’ Association which accepts complaints against television content from viewers.

The police were also asked by the court to file a counter affidavit to explain the steps being taken by them against IPL-V organisers for telecasting "uncensored and indecent" show by "semi-nude dancers" during the event in April. In his interim orders, Justice N Kiriubakaran directed state police, DGP and IGs of South and Central zones, to present the case diary after the court's April 20, 2012 order.

On an early date, the judge wondered if any control mechanism was in place since this was a national programme telecast across the country. Justice N Kiriubakaran directed police to produce the copy of DVD with recording of the programme. He further directed police not to take any coercive action as per the FIR till September 21.

He further said that performers including Bollywood stars Amitabh Bachchan, Salman Khan, Kareena Kapoor, Priyanka Chopra, American pop star Katy Perry and Australian cricketer Douglas Bollinger, along with BCCI chief N Srinivasan and IPL Chairman Rajeev Shukla were liable for prosecution under various IPC sections.

Earlier on Oct 1, the court had observed that there was prima facie evidence to suggest that an 'obscene' performance was indeed held during IPL-V in Chennai inauguration ceremony on April. Justice Kirubakaran was unconvinced by the arguments of the counsel for Bollywood actors Salman Khan, Priyanka Chopra and Amitabh Bachchan who argued that the actors performed as per what they were told by choreographers. "The performance was according to the agreement and the instructions of the choreographers. The choice of dress was not that of the actors," said the counsel. The judge asked, "Is it right for you to perform with two piece dress just because the choreographers suggested."

The Centre had informed the court that Information and Broadcasting Ministry monitors such programmes through Electronic Media Monitoring Centre for violations under Cable TV Networks Act 1995. The Under Secretary of the I&B Ministry DC Pathak said Cable TV Networks Act 1995 regulated such programmes and advertisements. During the programme, there wasn’t any pre-censorship, but certain codes had to be followed under that act.

Source: http://cablequest.org/news/legal-news/item/672-the-madras-high-court-says-broadcast-media-should-be-controlled-through-statutory-body.html