Sting ops: Need to strike balance between rights & responsibilities

By Satya Prakash

Advertisement

In a verdict delivered earlier this month, the Delhi High Court justified sting operations, saying these occupied “a place of their own and are today an important part of the society”. It rejected a suit filed by Indian Potash Limited claiming Rs 11 crore in damages for defamation from the owner, editor and reporters of Star News for a sting operation aired in 2007 showing sale of adulterated milk in Western Uttar Pradesh.

“Courts, while dealing with claims of defamation from such sting operations, cannot be unmindful of the purpose they serve in the society. Awarding compensation/damages for defamation against persons, who at their own cost, inconvenience and risk of being beaten up on their cover being blown; carry out such sting operations, will act as a deterrent and ultimately result in the society being deprived of the benefit thereof,” said the High Court.

The seemingly progressive verdict supporting media freedom has, however, left many unanswered questions. How far journalists can go in their attempts to expose corruption or crime? Can they legitimately use sting operations against those involved or suspected to be involved in anti-social activities? Should journalists enjoy immunity against possible prosecution for illegal acts committed in the course of conducting sting operations? Can they be sued for damages if they defame someone or end up violating a person’s right to privacy? What if a sting operation has been conducted with some ulterior motive? These questions have become all the more important after the Supreme Court’s 2017 verdict declaring right to privacy a fundamental right.

Journalists are supposed to inform, educate and entertain their readers/viewers and set the agenda for debate and discussion in the society. But there can be situations when normal tools of journalism fail to bring out the truth and a journalist/media house is forced to resort to sting operation to discharge their duty as a watchdog for democracy and society. But it has to be an exception rather than the rule.

It’s the watchdog journalism that pushes them towards activism, often inviting criticism from various quarters. In the absence of any specific law to deal with sting operation, journalists often breach “Lakshman Rekha” of law, ethics and morality, undermining the credibility of the “Fourth Estate”. A Delhi school teacher had fallen prey to such a sting operation over a decade ago.

As society evolves and technology changes, media faces new challenges which demand innovative thinking and legal tools to solve problems that confront journalist. Unfortunately, the leaders of media industry have turned a blind eye to these challenges, leaving it to others to take initiatives and suggest solutions.

The Committee on Petitions of Rajya Sabha in 2008 said, “The electronic media should not air information gathered through sting operation unless and until there is ample evidence to conclusively prove the guilt of the alleged accused; if it is required in public interest, the version of the alleged accused should also be aired simultaneously and with equal prominence…Where a sting operation is found to be false and fabricated, the media company ought to be given stringent punitive punishment commensurate with the damage caused to the innocent individual…”

The Ethics Committee too in 2006 stressed the need to evolve a regulatory mechanism for undercover operations which have the potential of encroaching upon the right to privacy of an individual and said a self-regulatory mechanism should be put in place.

In 2008, the News Broadcasting Association (NBA) set up a self-regulatory body, but it has not been effective in the absence of statutory backing.

“With these rights (of press freedoms) come responsibilities to the public interest: to respect the truth, to obey the law and to uphold the rights and liberties of individuals.”

These words from Lord Justice Leveson’s report on Culture, Practice and Ethics of the Press in Great Britain are no less relevant for Indian media.

Court’s latest take

• While dealing with claims of defamation from sting operations, courts cannot be unmindful of the purpose they serve in the society
• Awarding damages for defamation against persons, who… carry out such sting operations, will act as a deterrent and ultimately result in the society being deprived of the benefit thereof