Srinagar: The Jammu and Kashmir police’s decision to pursue legal action against scribes and photographers who come close to gunbattle sites or near scenes of clashes between forces and protesters has created a flutter in the press fraternity in Kashmir, with media bodies terming the latest decree as a “tactic to coerce journalists into not reporting facts on the ground”. Media freedom has been frequently subject to restrictions in Kashmir and journalists often find themselves summoned to police stations, booked under FIRs and manhandled by the forces. On Tuesday, Vijay Kumar, Kashmir’s inspector general of police, warned journalists against covering operations at gun-fire sites in the real-time and printing content that “promotes anti-national sentiment”. “The media persons should do not carry any live coverage of any encounter or law and order situation,” a local wire service quoted him saying. “The freedom of speech and expression is subject to reasonable restrictions that should not violate other person’s right to life guaranteed under Article 21 or putting the national security in jeopardy.” On Wednesday evening, Kumar said he has issued written directions to all district Senior Superintendents of Police (SSPs) to take legal action “based on facts” against media professionals who come close to gunbattle sites or near scenes of “law and order” situations. “I have already issued written directions to all districts SSPs yesterday. District SSPs will take legal action on facts,” Kumar told a wire agency on Wednesday, adding that directions applied to both national as well as for local media outlets. Kumar did not entertain calls from The Wire to confirm the reports. However, another SSP-level officer said that there was no order on this front and IG police “has just quoted Hon’ble Supreme court order and Cable TV Act”. He did not specify which apex court order was cited. Also read: Despite Reporting With ‘Utmost Honesty’, Threat of Arrest Looms Over Kashmiri Journalist The latest announcements have triggered a wave of apprehensions among Kashmiri photojournalists, who said they were unsure how security forces are going to react the next time they approach an encounter site. “Already, police stops us at the peripheral cordon when the encounter is going on,” said Waseem Nabi, a Kashmiri photojournalist. “Only after the gunbattles end do we swarm to the site of operation. In this light, it is really confusing what the directions want to convey.” The announcements also follow a cordon and search operation at Gulab Bagh area at the outskirts of Srinagar city on Wednesday. The 17-hour-long search operation during which forces claimed they fired warning shots to elicit a retaliatory fire from militants, ended without any exchange with reports claiming that militants may have escaped. When journalists reached the site the next day, they discovered a white-coloured building riddled with what appeared to be marks from heavy ammunition rounds. The interior of the building was also damaged significantly. Journalists in Kashmir have often found themselves at the receiving end of police action when anti-militant operations are underway. There are instances of journalists suffering violence at the hands of security forces during stone-pelting clashes and protests. Last week, a police constable was filmed kicking Qisar Mir, a Kashmiri photojournalist, near a gunfight site in Pulwama in South Kashmir. Similarly, Saqib Majeed and Shafat Farooq, two photojournalists covering clashes outside Jamia Masjid in Srinagar, claimed they were manhandled by policemen last month. Farooq, who said cops hit him with the rear end of a rifle, was later hospitalised. Kashmiri journalists are befuddled by the choice of words used by the police. “They say we are covering live encounters when actually we have never done that,” said Syed Shahriyar, a multimedia journalist who has been published by VICE news, BBC, Independent and Al Jazeera. “We only rush to gunfight site when forces withdraw. By placing restrictions on that, maybe the police is trying to convey that we mustn’t cover these events at all.” Coverage of gunfight sites has been an emotive issue for security agencies in Kashmir. The reports of destruction of residential or commercial structures where militants take shelter have become a source of simmering anger among the civilian population. During the last week’s encounter at Kakapora in Pulwama, video clips showing forces blowing up a house using improvised explosive devices went viral on the internet and elicited a resentful response from Kashmiri social media users. Also read: Srinagar: Journalists Allege Manhandling by Police Amidst Clashes at Jamia Masjid Last month too, six houses were razed to rubble during a gunfight at Rawalpora village in Shopian. Through media interviews with the locals, it came to light that villagers were allegedly told by the army to spray their houses with combustible liquid and set fire to them. The army later issued a statement refuting such charges. Last year, during a similar fire-exchange in Nawa Kadal area of Srinagar city, dozens of houses were destroyed. The editor of the news website that reported the extent of the destruction was later summoned by the police over his publication’s coverage. In Kashmir, media bodies have said they feel anguished at the police’s decision to place further restrictions on covering gunfight scenes. “If this is a part of the official policy of police then it appears to be a tactic to coerce journalists into not reporting facts on the ground,” a statement from 11 Kashmir-based media conglomerations said. “It also seems to be a part of the string of measures taken by the authorities to suppress freedom of press in the region.” The statement said that the media in Kashmir are aware of the journalistic guidelines and ethics they must demonstrate during gunfights and law and order situations, and that they have always upheld these principles. “Covering and reporting law and order situations in the region is one of the basic requirements for most news organisations and hence an essential part of the professional role of media professionals. Barring them from covering such events would mean stopping them from delivering their professional duties,” it said. “Press freedom is the cornerstone of a democracy and any attack on it undermines the democratic setup of which media is the fourth pillar. Any such attack on press freedom and journalism is highly distressful.”
Srinagar: The Jammu and Kashmir police’s decision to pursue legal action against scribes and photographers who come close to gunbattle sites or near scenes of clashes between forces and protesters has created a flutter in the press fraternity in Kashmir, with media bodies terming the latest decree as a “tactic to coerce journalists into not reporting facts on the ground”. Media freedom has been frequently subject to restrictions in Kashmir and journalists often find themselves summoned to police stations, booked under FIRs and manhandled by the forces. On Tuesday, Vijay Kumar, Kashmir’s inspector general of police, warned journalists against covering operations at gun-fire sites in the real-time and printing content that “promotes anti-national sentiment”. “The media persons should do not carry any live coverage of any encounter or law and order situation,” a local wire service quoted him saying. “The freedom of speech and expression is subject to reasonable restrictions that should not violate other person’s right to life guaranteed under Article 21 or putting the national security in jeopardy.” On Wednesday evening, Kumar said he has issued written directions to all district Senior Superintendents of Police (SSPs) to take legal action “based on facts” against media professionals who come close to gunbattle sites or near scenes of “law and order” situations. “I have already issued written directions to all districts SSPs yesterday. District SSPs will take legal action on facts,” Kumar told a wire agency on Wednesday, adding that directions applied to both national as well as for local media outlets. Kumar did not entertain calls from The Wire to confirm the reports. However, another SSP-level officer said that there was no order on this front and IG police “has just quoted Hon’ble Supreme court order and Cable TV Act”. He did not specify which apex court order was cited. Also read: Despite Reporting With ‘Utmost Honesty’, Threat of Arrest Looms Over Kashmiri Journalist The latest announcements have triggered a wave of apprehensions among Kashmiri photojournalists, who said they were unsure how security forces are going to react the next time they approach an encounter site. “Already, police stops us at the peripheral cordon when the encounter is going on,” said Waseem Nabi, a Kashmiri photojournalist. “Only after the gunbattles end do we swarm to the site of operation. In this light, it is really confusing what the directions want to convey.” The announcements also follow a cordon and search operation at Gulab Bagh area at the outskirts of Srinagar city on Wednesday. The 17-hour-long search operation during which forces claimed they fired warning shots to elicit a retaliatory fire from militants, ended without any exchange with reports claiming that militants may have escaped. When journalists reached the site the next day, they discovered a white-coloured building riddled with what appeared to be marks from heavy ammunition rounds. The interior of the building was also damaged significantly. Journalists in Kashmir have often found themselves at the receiving end of police action when anti-militant operations are underway. There are instances of journalists suffering violence at the hands of security forces during stone-pelting clashes and protests. Last week, a police constable was filmed kicking Qisar Mir, a Kashmiri photojournalist, near a gunfight site in Pulwama in South Kashmir. Similarly, Saqib Majeed and Shafat Farooq, two photojournalists covering clashes outside Jamia Masjid in Srinagar, claimed they were manhandled by policemen last month. Farooq, who said cops hit him with the rear end of a rifle, was later hospitalised. Kashmiri journalists are befuddled by the choice of words used by the police. “They say we are covering live encounters when actually we have never done that,” said Syed Shahriyar, a multimedia journalist who has been published by VICE news, BBC, Independent and Al Jazeera. “We only rush to gunfight site when forces withdraw. By placing restrictions on that, maybe the police is trying to convey that we mustn’t cover these events at all.” Coverage of gunfight sites has been an emotive issue for security agencies in Kashmir. The reports of destruction of residential or commercial structures where militants take shelter have become a source of simmering anger among the civilian population. During the last week’s encounter at Kakapora in Pulwama, video clips showing forces blowing up a house using improvised explosive devices went viral on the internet and elicited a resentful response from Kashmiri social media users. Also read: Srinagar: Journalists Allege Manhandling by Police Amidst Clashes at Jamia Masjid Last month too, six houses were razed to rubble during a gunfight at Rawalpora village in Shopian. Through media interviews with the locals, it came to light that villagers were allegedly told by the army to spray their houses with combustible liquid and set fire to them. The army later issued a statement refuting such charges. Last year, during a similar fire-exchange in Nawa Kadal area of Srinagar city, dozens of houses were destroyed. The editor of the news website that reported the extent of the destruction was later summoned by the police over his publication’s coverage. In Kashmir, media bodies have said they feel anguished at the police’s decision to place further restrictions on covering gunfight scenes. “If this is a part of the official policy of police then it appears to be a tactic to coerce journalists into not reporting facts on the ground,” a statement from 11 Kashmir-based media conglomerations said. “It also seems to be a part of the string of measures taken by the authorities to suppress freedom of press in the region.” The statement said that the media in Kashmir are aware of the journalistic guidelines and ethics they must demonstrate during gunfights and law and order situations, and that they have always upheld these principles. “Covering and reporting law and order situations in the region is one of the basic requirements for most news organisations and hence an essential part of the professional role of media professionals. Barring them from covering such events would mean stopping them from delivering their professional duties,” it said. “Press freedom is the cornerstone of a democracy and any attack on it undermines the democratic setup of which media is the fourth pillar. Any such attack on press freedom and journalism is highly distressful.”

Kashmir Journalists Confused, Worried by Police Warning Against Covering Gunbattles

April 9, 2021

Srinagar: The Jammu and Kashmir police’s decision to pursue legal action against scribes and photographers who come close to gunbattle sites or near scenes of clashes between forces and protesters has created a flutter in the press fraternity in Kashmir, with media bodies terming the latest decree as a “tactic to coerce journalists into not reporting facts on the ground”.

Media freedom has been frequently subject to restrictions in Kashmir and journalists often find themselves summoned to police stations, booked under FIRs, and manhandled by the forces.

On Tuesday, Vijay Kumar, Kashmir’s inspector general of police, warned journalists against covering operations at gun-fire sites in real-time and printing content that “promotes anti-national sentiment”.

“The media persons should do not carry any live coverage of any encounter or law and order situation,” a local wire service quoted him saying. “The freedom of speech and expression is subject to reasonable restrictions that should not violate other person’s right to life guaranteed under Article 21 or putting the national security in jeopardy.”

On Wednesday evening, Kumar said he has issued written directions to all district Senior Superintendents of Police (SSPs) to take legal action “based on facts” against media professionals who come close to gunbattle sites or near scenes of “law and order” situations.

“I have already issued written directions to all districts SSPs yesterday. District SSPs will take legal action on facts,” Kumar told a wire agency on Wednesday, adding that directions applied to both national as well as for local media outlets.
Kumar did not entertain calls from The Wire to confirm the reports. However, another SSP-level officer said that there was no order on this front and IG police “has just quoted Hon’ble Supreme court order and Cable TV Act”. He did not specify which apex court order was cited.

The latest announcements have triggered a wave of apprehensions among Kashmiri photojournalists, who said they were unsure how security forces are going to react the next time they approach an encounter site.

“Already, police stops us at the peripheral cordon when the encounter is going on,” said Waseem Nabi, a Kashmiri photojournalist. “Only after the gunbattles end does we swarm to the site of operation. In this light, it is really confusing what the directions want to convey.”

The announcements also follow a cordon and search operation at the Gulab Bagh area on the outskirts of Srinagar city on Wednesday. The 17-hour-long search operation during which forces claimed they fired warning shots to elicit a retaliatory fire from militants, ended without any exchange with reports claiming that militants may have escaped.

When journalists reached the site the next day, they discovered a white-colored building riddled with what appeared to be marked from heavy ammunition rounds. The interior of the building was also damaged significantly.

Journalists in Kashmir have often found themselves at the receiving end of police action when anti-militant operations are underway. There are instances of journalists suffering violence at the hands of security forces during stone-pelting clashes and protests.

Last week, a police constable was filmed kicking Qisar Mir, a Kashmiri photojournalist, near a gunfight site in Pulwama in South Kashmir.

Similarly, Saqib Majeed and Shafat Farooq, two photojournalists covering clashes outside Jamia Masjid in Srinagar, claimed they were manhandled by policemen last month. Farooq, who said cops hit him with the rear end of a rifle, was later hospitalized.

Kashmiri journalists are befuddled by the choice of words used by the police. “They say we are covering live encounters when actually we have never done that,” said Syed Shahriyar, a multimedia journalist who has been published by VICE News, BBC, Independent, and Al Jazeera. “We only rush to gunfight site when forces withdraw. By placing restrictions on that, maybe the police are trying to convey that we mustn’t cover these events at all.”

Coverage of gunfight sites has been an emotive issue for security agencies in Kashmir. The reports of destruction of residential or commercial structures where militants take shelter have become a source of simmering anger among the civilian population. During the last week’s encounter at Kakapora in Pulwama, video clips showing forces blowing up a house using improvised explosive devices went viral on the internet and elicited a resentful response from Kashmiri social media users.

Last month too, six houses were razed to rubble during a gunfight at Rawalpora village in Shopian. Through media interviews with the locals, it came to light that villagers were allegedly told by the army to spray their houses with combustible liquid and set fire to them. The army later issued a statement refuting such charges.

Last year, during a similar fire exchange in the Nawa Kadal area of Srinagar city, dozens of houses were destroyed. The editor of the news website that reported the extent of the destruction was later summoned by the police over his publication’s coverage.

In Kashmir, media bodies have said they feel anguished at the police’s decision to place further restrictions on covering gunfight scenes.

“If this is a part of the official policy of police then it appears to be a tactic to coerce journalists into not reporting facts on the ground,” a statement from 11 Kashmir-based media conglomerations said. “It also seems to be a part of the string of measures taken by the authorities to suppress freedom of the press in the region.”
The statement said that the media in Kashmir are aware of the journalistic guidelines and ethics they must demonstrate during gunfights and law and order situations and that they have always upheld these principles.

“Covering and reporting law and order situations in the region is one of the basic requirements for most news organizations and hence an essential part of the professional role of media professionals. Barring them from covering such events would mean stopping them from delivering their professional duties,” it said.
“Press freedom is the cornerstone of democracy and any attack on it undermines the democratic setup of which media is the fourth pillar. Any such attack on press freedom and journalism is highly distressful.”

Nidae Kashmir

A best news channel which publishes latest videos from Jammu and Kashmir which includes Politics, Public Grievances, Current affairs, Off-beat stories, Religion, etc. and We want to combine literature and journalism on one platform.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Banner

New Delhi: Most days are not good days for Indian filmmakers. But the abolition of the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) – a statutory body addressing filmmakers aggrieved by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) decisions – has made bad days worse. Indian film certification comprises three bodies: the Examining Committee, the Revising Committee, and the FCAT. If a director is dissatisfied with the Examining Committee, then she approaches the Revising Committee. If she disagrees with the Revising Committee, then her final recourse is the FCAT – followed by the courts. But the FCAT abolition has removed a crucial link in the process, compelling the filmmakers to approach the judiciary, an expensive and time-consuming procedure. Sure, the FCAT wasn’t perfect. Ask Meera Chaudhary, the co-director of the documentary En Dino Muzaffarnagar. In August 2014, the FCAT upheld the CBFC’s order, refusing to certify the film, saying the documentary had “grave potential of creating communal disharmony”. En Dino Muzaffarnagar never released. But in several cases, the FCAT did champion freedom of expression. It cleared several recent films, including Great Grand Masti; Shaheb, Bibi, Golaam; Haraamkhor; Lipstick Under My Burkha; and Babumoshai Bandookbaaz, with an “A” certificate, overturning the CBFC’s unreasonable objections and inordinate cuts. The FCAT, in fact, also saved one of the most controversial Indian films, Bandit Queen. The Tribunal head, in that remarkable decision, suggested that the censor board representative “take a trip to Khajuraho” to “understand the difference between nakedness, nudity, and obscenity”. So, the filmmakers quite rightly considered the FCAT a reliable bulwark against the CBFC’s (often) draconian orders. The FCAT even rescued the former CBFC chief, Pahlaj Nihalani, from the clutches of the censor board, reducing the number of cuts in his 2018 film, Rangeela Raja, from 20 to three. Former CBFC chief Pahlaj Nihalani. Photo: Facebook/Pahlaj Nihalani The FCAT has been historically more progressive than the CBFC. But the filmmakers also liked it for a different reason: It dispended quick judgments, allowing the producers to release their films on time, saving them from financial loss. It was also a sweet spot between the censor board and the courts, as the FCAT members at times also included people from the film fraternity, who knew how to judge a movie in the right context. The FCAT abolition will also overburden the courts, exacerbating their post-COVID-19 lockdown backlog. In 2018 and 2019, for instance, 53 filmmakers approached the FCAT: that is, in the present scenario, a case every two weeks. This decision then doesn’t seem friendly for either the filmmakers or the courts. Whom does it benefit then? The Central government, of course. Every ruling party, irrespective of its ideology, has tried controlling the filmmaking narrative in this country. But the level of censorship over the last seven years has been quite unprecedented. Less than six weeks ago, the government issued guidelines for the OTT platforms, wanting to exercise greater control over channels that don’t come under the purview of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting whose legality was questioned by a parliamentary panel. This also seems like a disjointed decision, because it contradicts the recommendations of the 2013 Justice Mudgal report and the 2016 Shyam Benegal report. If the Mudgal committee wanted to expand the ambit of the FCAT, then the Benegal team wanted the Tribunal to be “empowered to cover all grievances under the lines of Broadcasting Content Complaints Council”. The filmmakers are understandably disappointed, as this decision humiliates them further. Vishal Bhardwaj called it a “sad day for cinema”. Hansal Mehta considered the abolition “arbitrary” and “restrictive”. Anurag Kashyap, familiar with censorship troubles, said that the producers would “become scared to get caught in the loop of the high court” and that it’d “discourage filmmakers to make movies on stronger themes”. The Narendra Modi government has never enjoyed a healthy relationship with the film fraternity. Before it targeted the JNU students, it tried to control the Film and Television Institute of India by appointing Gajendra Chauhan, a forgotten side actor and a BJP member, as its chairman. That sparked a huge protest, culminating in dozens of filmmakers and writers returning their National Awards. But the government and the prime minister continued to court a select few from the industry, clicking selfies with them, showering them with prestigious awards. It is quite clear that, when it comes to filmmaking expression in this country, the ruling party is the real director, reducing filmmakers to props, making them dance to arbitrary tunes.
Previous Story

With Abolition of Film Certificate Tribunal, Bad Days for Filmmakers Will Become Worse

Resurgence of COVID-19 in India: A Tale of Six Unlearnt Lessons
Next Story

Resurgence of COVID-19 in India: A Tale of Six Unlearnt Lessons

Latest from Breaking News

Go toTop