Category: Supreme Court

Delhi govt TV ads ‘beyond responsibility’: CAG

MUMBAI: The Comptroller and Auditor General of India’s audit report on Friday said that advertisements released outside Delhi last year, constituting around 86 per cent of the total expenditure of Rs 33.4 crore, was “beyond the responsibility” of the Delhi government.

The state government explained that the ads were issued outside Delhi because there was “immense potential to promote trade, tourism, and retail businesses…the achievements made in critical sectors such as health, education, etc were highlighted to attract best talent and businesses to the national capital.”

CAG also grilled the state government for its plan to establish ‘Shabdarth’ as its in-house ad-agency, saying the aim was to reduce the cost of official publicity.

The Aam Aadmi Party government in Delhi, the CAG found, invested Rs 28.7 crore on ads outside the capital in a single campaign during its first year in office. The auditor also stated that some contents of the publicity material violated the Supreme Court’s guidelines on acceptable matter in such ads, the Times of India reported.

Between 14 and 17 February, 2016, the Delhi government inserted advertorials in 26 national and 37 regional newspapers in 14 states. Nine television clips were sanctioned for broadcast on 89 channels, including regional ones, between 15 February and 1 March, while seven radio jingles were aired between 13 and 19 February.

CAG, however, did not find the explanation tenable since the jingles and TV clips showed the achievements not as those of the government but “of a political party”. Besides, the advertisements were “not linked to GNCTD’s constitutional and legal obligations towards the citizenry of NCT of Delhi.”

The audit report listed ads worth Rs 24.2 crore released in this period as not conforming to the apex court guidelines. While the television and print ads referred to the Delhi government as “AAP government” and “Kejriwal sarkar” or as “AAP”, some of those also carried pictures of Delhi ministers in violation of the SC guidelines.

The government has argued that “Kejriwal sarkar” was simply “a nomenclature used by the public… to refer to Delhi government.”

AlsO Read :

SC recognises ASCI role

Govt campaigns cost exchequer double than Mars mission

Only one-third of govt ads went to electronic media

Magic ‘dawakhana’ TV ads to be curbed

March 11, 2017
Supreme Court flags privacy issues regarding WhatsApp, FB

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday sought the central government’s response on a plea seeking to put in place regulation to protect the privacy of the messages of WhatsApp and Facebook users.

The court also issued notices to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), online messaging service WhatsApp and the social networking site Facebook, according to a report filed by news agency IANS.

Petitioners Karmanya Singh Sareen and Shreya Singhal contended that under the new policy of WhatsApp, the online messaging service could access, read, share and use the contents for commercial purposes. A bench of Chief Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud said, “It is a private person extending a private service. You take it or leave it — that is your right.”

Appearing for the petitioners, senior counsel Harish Salve told the court that it was the duty of the government to protect people’s rights under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution and safeguard their privacy.
As he urged the court to intervene in the matter as new policy of WhatsApp affected the privacy of the people using the site, the bench observed whenever the messaging service will change their conditions, they will give a notice to its users, IANS reported.

Telling the court that private communication between two persons had to be protected, Salve said that TRAI was not doing anything about it and government was under duty to regulate the online messaging site and the social networking site. The court was told that TRAI has inserted a condition, which says that if you intercept a call without government permission, you would be prosecuted.

Sareen and Singhal have challenged Delhi High Court’s September 23, 2016 order by which it had allowed WhatsApp to roll out its new privacy policy but said it cannot share data of its users collected up to September 25, 2016 with Facebook or any other related company.

The High Court had further directed that WhatsApp would completely delete all data of users who chooses to opt out of the instant messaging app after the coming into force of its new privacy policy. While allowing WhatsApp to roll out its new privacy policy, it had said: “We have taken note of the fact that under the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the users are given an option to delete their WhatsApp account at any time, in which event, the information of the users would be deleted from the servers of WhatsApp. We are, therefore, of the view that it is always open to the existing users of WhatsApp, who do not want their information to be shared with Facebook, to opt for deletion of their account.”

The High Court had also asked the Centre to consider if instant messaging app WhatsApp and social networking site could be brought under the statutory regulatory framework.

TRAI is undertaking a consultation process, at the moment, to decide on Net Neutrality, which will at one point of time will also take into account services like WhatsApp, FB Messenger and other similar services offered by Indian companies too.

January 17, 2017
Supreme Court flags privacy issues regarding WhatsApp, FB

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday sought the central government’s response on a plea seeking to put in place regulation to protect the privacy of the messages of WhatsApp and Facebook users.

The court also issued notices to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), online messaging service WhatsApp and the social networking site Facebook, according to a report filed by news agency IANS.

Petitioners Karmanya Singh Sareen and Shreya Singhal contended that under the new policy of WhatsApp, the online messaging service could access, read, share and use the contents for commercial purposes. A bench of Chief Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud said, “It is a private person extending a private service. You take it or leave it — that is your right.”

Appearing for the petitioners, senior counsel Harish Salve told the court that it was the duty of the government to protect people’s rights under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution and safeguard their privacy.
As he urged the court to intervene in the matter as new policy of WhatsApp affected the privacy of the people using the site, the bench observed whenever the messaging service will change their conditions, they will give a notice to its users, IANS reported.

Telling the court that private communication between two persons had to be protected, Salve said that TRAI was not doing anything about it and government was under duty to regulate the online messaging site and the social networking site. The court was told that TRAI has inserted a condition, which says that if you intercept a call without government permission, you would be prosecuted.

Sareen and Singhal have challenged Delhi High Court’s September 23, 2016 order by which it had allowed WhatsApp to roll out its new privacy policy but said it cannot share data of its users collected up to September 25, 2016 with Facebook or any other related company.

The High Court had further directed that WhatsApp would completely delete all data of users who chooses to opt out of the instant messaging app after the coming into force of its new privacy policy. While allowing WhatsApp to roll out its new privacy policy, it had said: “We have taken note of the fact that under the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the users are given an option to delete their WhatsApp account at any time, in which event, the information of the users would be deleted from the servers of WhatsApp. We are, therefore, of the view that it is always open to the existing users of WhatsApp, who do not want their information to be shared with Facebook, to opt for deletion of their account.”

The High Court had also asked the Centre to consider if instant messaging app WhatsApp and social networking site could be brought under the statutory regulatory framework.

TRAI is undertaking a consultation process, at the moment, to decide on Net Neutrality, which will at one point of time will also take into account services like WhatsApp, FB Messenger and other similar services offered by Indian companies too.

January 17, 2017
Why can’t pvt FM channels have news, SC asks govt

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the government to explain the continuing prohibition on FM radio stations and community radios from airing news and current affairs at par with private TV channels and the print media.

The observation by the chief justice of India J.S. Khehar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud came on a public interest litigation filed in 2013 by Common Cause, and the Court asked why the government wanted to control news on radio, which covers almost the entire population including the rural masses.

The court directed the government to explain in four weeks the series of orders passed between 2008 and 2013 preventing private radio from airing their own news and current affairs broadcasts.

The government’s prohibition, Common Cause argued, was in clear violation of the Supreme Court’s landmark verdict in 1995 in the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting vs Cricket Association of Bengal when the court had held that “airwaves are public property to be used to promote public good and expressing a plurality of views, opinions and ideas”. That judgment had led to the passing of the Cable TV Networks (Regulation) Act 1995.

Common Cause counsel Prashant Bhushan and Kamini Jaiswal said that policy Guidelines and of the Grant of Permission Agreements framed by the government which prohibit private FM radio stations and community radio stations from broadcasting their own news and current affairs programmes clearly violate the fundamental right of the freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution.

For more details: Why can private FM channels not have their own news bulletins, Supreme Court asks Govt.

Also Read :

‘Risk’ in FM stations airing news, apprehends Prasar head

TRAI: FM Radio ad revenues move up in Q2-17

Big Ganga strengthens weekend programming; four shows planned in Jan

January 17, 2017
Why can’t pvt FM channels have news, SC asks govt

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the government to explain the continuing prohibition on FM radio stations and community radios from airing news and current affairs at par with private TV channels and the print media.

The observation by the chief justice of India J.S. Khehar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud came on a public interest litigation filed in 2013 by Common Cause, and the Court asked why the government wanted to control news on radio, which covers almost the entire population including the rural masses.

The court directed the government to explain in four weeks the series of orders passed between 2008 and 2013 preventing private radio from airing their own news and current affairs broadcasts.

The government’s prohibition, Common Cause argued, was in clear violation of the Supreme Court’s landmark verdict in 1995 in the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting vs Cricket Association of Bengal when the court had held that “airwaves are public property to be used to promote public good and expressing a plurality of views, opinions and ideas”. That judgment had led to the passing of the Cable TV Networks (Regulation) Act 1995.

Common Cause counsel Prashant Bhushan and Kamini Jaiswal said that policy Guidelines and of the Grant of Permission Agreements framed by the government which prohibit private FM radio stations and community radio stations from broadcasting their own news and current affairs programmes clearly violate the fundamental right of the freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution.

For more details: Why can private FM channels not have their own news bulletins, Supreme Court asks Govt.

Also Read :

‘Risk’ in FM stations airing news, apprehends Prasar head

TRAI: FM Radio ad revenues move up in Q2-17

Big Ganga strengthens weekend programming; four shows planned in Jan

January 17, 2017
SC to MIB: Get mechanism to deal with complaints on TV, radio shows

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Central Government to set up a statutory mechanism to deal with citizens’ complaints against TV and radio programmes.

A bench comprising Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud asked the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) to use the power under section 22 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act and set up a body to deal with complaints against television and radio channels, PTI reported.

The court considered the submission of the Centre that there was a mechanism to deal with such cases. “The Union of India said that there is a mechanism. We, however, feel that it needs adequate publicity so as to enable common public to seek redressal of grievance,” the court was quoted in the PTI report.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for NGO Common Cause, said that “this business of self regulation business doesn’t work”.

At present while the News Broadcasters’ Association of India (NBA) has a self-regulatory mechanism to look into complaints received from citizens and viewers relating to its member-TV channels, there is no such set-up for the non-news TV channels in the country.

Broadcast and telecoms regulator TRAI oversees the carriage and tariff related issues pertaining to broadcast and cable. The content side of the industry is still regulated by MIB, which issues show-cause notices to various TV channels on content-related issues after receiving complaints or suggestions from viewers in general. The government also has a state-of-the-art on-air content monitoring facility in Delhi.

Most recently, MIB had asked NDTV India news channels to shutter for a day as a penalty for breaching content code as envisaged in various government rules and regulations and amended from time to time. NDTV India issue related to airing of programmes and information allegedly considered to compromise the nation’s security. However, under media and public pressure, the government kept the order in abeyance late last year.

ALSO READ : MIB puts NDTV India ban on hold until further notice

Govt hands NDTV India 24-hr ban for breach of content code

Content Regulation on Private TV Channels

January 13, 2017
SC to MIB: Get mechanism to deal with complaints on TV, radio shows

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Central Government to set up a statutory mechanism to deal with citizens’ complaints against TV and radio programmes.

A bench comprising Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud asked the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) to use the power under section 22 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act and set up a body to deal with complaints against television and radio channels, PTI reported.

The court considered the submission of the Centre that there was a mechanism to deal with such cases. “The Union of India said that there is a mechanism. We, however, feel that it needs adequate publicity so as to enable common public to seek redressal of grievance,” the court was quoted in the PTI report.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for NGO Common Cause, said that “this business of self regulation business doesn’t work”.

At present while the News Broadcasters’ Association of India (NBA) has a self-regulatory mechanism to look into complaints received from citizens and viewers relating to its member-TV channels, there is no such set-up for the non-news TV channels in the country.

Broadcast and telecoms regulator TRAI oversees the carriage and tariff related issues pertaining to broadcast and cable. The content side of the industry is still regulated by MIB, which issues show-cause notices to various TV channels on content-related issues after receiving complaints or suggestions from viewers in general. The government also has a state-of-the-art on-air content monitoring facility in Delhi.

Most recently, MIB had asked NDTV India news channels to shutter for a day as a penalty for breaching content code as envisaged in various government rules and regulations and amended from time to time. NDTV India issue related to airing of programmes and information allegedly considered to compromise the nation’s security. However, under media and public pressure, the government kept the order in abeyance late last year.

ALSO READ : MIB puts NDTV India ban on hold until further notice

Govt hands NDTV India 24-hr ban for breach of content code

Content Regulation on Private TV Channels

January 13, 2017
Crime videos notice: SC asks Silicon Valley giants to reply by 9 January

MUMBAI: The Supreme Court of India has sent notices to Facebook, Google and others over sharing of cyber crime videos. The two, and Yahoo and Microsoft have been asked to reply to the notice by NGO Prajwala by 9 January.

The apex court had issued the notices on the plea seeking to curb the sharing of videos displaying sexual assault and cyber crime. The NGO had sought plea seeking for the enterprises to have a defined place to report rape videos and seek to block them.

India’s top court was concerned over illicit activities and cyber abuse that allegedly occured on the four search engines. The court asked the Silicon Valley giants why they were not preventing users from behaviors including circulating rape videos and posting other private content without the subjects’ consent.

As per a report by PTI, a bench consisting of judges M B Lokur and U U Lalit issued the notices. The court was hearing a letter that was written to former Chief Justice of India, H L Dattu, by the Hyderabad-based NGO. The letter was accompanied by a pen drive, which contained two rape videos.

Aparna Bhatt, the NGO’s advocate, said that videos depicting sexual offences were shared on social networking sites and these companies should take steps to curb such cybercrime.

Solicitor-General Maninder Singh, representing the Center, listed the steps taken by the union home ministry and CBI. The bench however said that the, if names of the victims were to be made public, it should be done only after conviction in the offence, and not immediately after the case was lodged.

Although these companies often prevent offensive content on their platforms, the issue in this instance is the failure of communication between the tech giants, service providers, and government officials.

This is not the maiden event the Indian court has had an issue with leading companies. In July 2016, the court concluded that Bing, Google and Yahoo put up advertisements for kits and clinics that helped people determine the sex of a foetus which is illegal in India.

December 7, 2016
Crime videos notice: SC asks Silicon Valley giants to reply by 9 January

MUMBAI: The Supreme Court of India has sent notices to Facebook, Google and others over sharing of cyber crime videos. The two, and Yahoo and Microsoft have been asked to reply to the notice by NGO Prajwala by 9 January.

The apex court had issued the notices on the plea seeking to curb the sharing of videos displaying sexual assault and cyber crime. The NGO had sought plea seeking for the enterprises to have a defined place to report rape videos and seek to block them.

India’s top court was concerned over illicit activities and cyber abuse that allegedly occured on the four search engines. The court asked the Silicon Valley giants why they were not preventing users from behaviors including circulating rape videos and posting other private content without the subjects’ consent.

As per a report by PTI, a bench consisting of judges M B Lokur and U U Lalit issued the notices. The court was hearing a letter that was written to former Chief Justice of India, H L Dattu, by the Hyderabad-based NGO. The letter was accompanied by a pen drive, which contained two rape videos.

Aparna Bhatt, the NGO’s advocate, said that videos depicting sexual offences were shared on social networking sites and these companies should take steps to curb such cybercrime.

Solicitor-General Maninder Singh, representing the Center, listed the steps taken by the union home ministry and CBI. The bench however said that the, if names of the victims were to be made public, it should be done only after conviction in the offence, and not immediately after the case was lodged.

Although these companies often prevent offensive content on their platforms, the issue in this instance is the failure of communication between the tech giants, service providers, and government officials.

This is not the maiden event the Indian court has had an issue with leading companies. In July 2016, the court concluded that Bing, Google and Yahoo put up advertisements for kits and clinics that helped people determine the sex of a foetus which is illegal in India.

December 7, 2016
SC refuses to stay demonetisation

MUMBAI: The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday refused to stay the Central Government’s notification demonetising Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes but asked it to enlist the measures to minimise public inconvenience. It asked the Centre to take immediate steps to alleviate the hardships of the common man. “Discontinuing of higher denomination notes appears to be carpet bombing, and not a surgical strike,” the court said.

The apex court was hearing a bunch of petitions demanding the rollback of the decision to scrap old notes. Without issuing any notice to the RBI or the Centre, the apex court posted the matter for further hearing on 25 November. “We will not be granting any stay,” a bench comprising Chief Justice TS Thakur and DY Chandrachud said. The remarks were made after some advocates insisted on a stay.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, however, said he was not seeking a stay on the notification but seeking answers from the government about the steps taken to lessen public inconvenience. The bench asked attorney-general Mukul Rohatgi to file an affidavit about the measures already undertaken by the government and the Reserve Bank of India to minimise public inconvenience and the steps likely to be taken in future.

The Centre, which had filed a caveat in the matter, sought dismissal of the petitions challenging demonetisation on several grounds including that they were “misconceived”. Rohatgi outlined the idea behind demonetisation and said large number of counterfeit currency has been used to finance terrorism in various parts of the country including in Jammu and Kashmir and northeastern states.

Rohatgi informed the bench that Rs 3.25 lakh crore were deposited in the banks since 10 November, and Rs 11 lakh crore would be added in the next few days. He also said there were as many as 24 crore bank accounts including 22 crore opened under the ‘Jan Dhan Scheme’, and the Centre was hopeful to “ramp up” the outflow of the cash to banks, post offices and two lakh ATMs across the country.

November 15, 2016