Name Viraj Malik

Registration Number 24MCAL15

Course Media & Telecommunication Laws

Specialization LLM (Constitutional & Administrative Law)

Research Topic Silencing The Media 2020-2024: The Alarming Trend Of UAPA
Being Used Against Journalists

Continuous Evaluation Content Analysis

Faculty Dr. Asha Verma, Dr. Niyati Pandey & Ms. Anamika Shukla

Submission Deadline 30th September 2024

1
 Table of Contents

Chapter Particulars Page No.

I Introduction 3

Overview & Background of Case Studies 4-5

Objectives of Content Analysis 6

II Comprehension of News 7

News Shown By Various Channels & Newspapers 8-10

Comparative Drawings 11-12

III Analytical Findings 13

Instances of “Trial By Media” 14

Adherence to Ethical Standards 15

Impact on Public Perception and Legal Proceedings 16

IV Clinching Remarks 17

Implication of Findings & Recommendations 18

2
 V References 19-20

Chapter I: Introduction

Of late, the UAPA has been one of the most assailed pieces of legislation in the country,
particularly for its tendency to become a ready tool aimed at silencing journalists, activists, and
dissenters. The law enacted was primarily to deal with terrorism and similar serious perceived
threats to the security of a country, and most of the provisions under the UAPA are broad, ill-
defined, and give wide powers to the state to arrest and detain individuals without formally
pressing charges or giving bail for considerably long periods.Those most targeted under the
UAPA include journalists and activists that report on sensitive issues, such as government
actions in areas of conflict, human rights abuses, or political dissent. Critics say this law has been
abused in order to kill free speech and press freedom by labeling legitimate journalism and
activism "anti-national" or activities that create a threat to national security.It has involved the
arrest of high-profile cases among others of journalists like Siddique Kappan, who was detained
on his way to cover an incident in Uttar Pradesh under the UAPA. The arrest caused an national
and international uproar when many saw it as a move to intimidate the press and dissuade critical
reporting. The invoking of UAPA against journalists portends very grave implications for the
tenuous space for free expression in India and a chilling effect on investigation as an important
tool to hold power to account. Critics-from global human rights organizations onward-have
called for repeal or amendment of the UAPA with a view to avoiding its misuse against
journalists and other peaceful dissenters. The provisions under UAPA are so sweeping that even
intention to commit an unlawful act is sufficient to arrest, hence giving the authorities enormous
leeway to target those who criticize government policy or expose corruption and human rights
abuses. This has perpetuated a climate of fear among the fraternity of journalists, more so those
reporting on sensitive issues relating to government actions in Kashmir, rights of subalterns, and
the security forces' activities. Many have reason to fear that their work could be termed seditious
or supportive of terrorism and hence find themselves vulnerable to arrest under the UAPA. Most
of them have expressed apprehension that the application of UAPA is not right to muzzle press
freedom, and international bodies like the United Nations and Human Rights Watch asked India

3
to protect the rights of journalists. Undaunted, on its part, the government insists it needs the
UAPA even as the application against these journalists brings up profound questions regarding
the hallowed balance of national security with democratic freedoms.

Overview & Background of Case Studies

Case I- Siddique Kappan

Kerala journalist Siddique Kappan was arrested on October 5, 2020, while he was on his way to
Hathras in Uttar Pradesh to report the gangrape and subsequent death of a young Dalit woman.
The arrest of Siddique Kappan had sparked unprecedented outrage. He was picked up by the
Uttar Pradesh police before reaching the site of the incident for his alleged links with the Popular
Front of India, an organization believed to have links with extremist groups. The police, on the
contrary, said Kappan was not there to report what happened but to ferment trouble and disrupt
the peace of the community. He was charged with sedition and also under the very strict anti-
terrorist law Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, among other serious offenses. This arrest of
Kappan has drawn severe criticism and is said to be an act against the very freedom of the press;
in fact, he is supposedly being targeted because of his profession as a journalist. There was little
evidence against him, some pieces of literature in his possession, for which continuous bail
denial kept him in prison for over two years. It was a case of sheer abuse of the UAPA to
suppress the voice of dissent. It was only this September 2022 that the Supreme Court of India
granted bail to Kappan for want of evidence in view of serious charges against him. The court
made this serious enough to raise freedom of the Press in a democracy, also questioning

4
detention for such long periods. Kappan has since turned into an impeccable example that brings
into the light the growing repression on journalists and civil liberties in India protected against
misuse of anti-terrorism laws

Case II- Shyam Meera Singh.

Shyam Meera Singh is a young journalist who, for blunt criticism of the government, has been at
the eye of the storm, bringing forth very disturbing questions on the freedom of the press in
India. It all started in 2021 when Tripura, an Indian northeastern state, witnessed wide-scale
communal violence. Protests had erupted over an attack on Hindu minorities in Bangladesh and
waves of unrest and fear were now spreading everywhere around the region. It was amidst all
this mayhem that Shyam posted on a social media platform that "Tripura is burning," a slogan
that would soon be the center of controversy. His intentions were pretty clear: let others take note
of the increasing violence at hand and the plight of those caught in it. To the authorities, this just
urged a situation-a situation that can encourage further unrest. Shyam is a journalist and was
booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, along with a few lawyers and
activists. This controversial anti-terror law has been increasingly criticized as it has been used
against journalists and dissenters.

5
The case against Shyam has since exploded into cries that see it as an obvious attempt to muzzle
one loud voice.It is aspects like long detention without bail that the UAPA has, in total, faced
much criticism. Critics have said that it has been used to muzzle dissent and as a deterrent for
those who dare challenge the status quo. For Shyam, a journalist whose work is founded on
speaking truth to power, what he faces-charges-are not just a personal affront; it's also a chilling
message to an entire press fraternity. What is already sure, however, is that the case has shaken
the very conscience of the journalistic fraternity and beyond. It underlines the growing risks
involved in being a journalist in India, an increasingly threatening country for freedom of the
press. Human rights organizations, legal experts, and bodies of the press have come out against
such use of UAPA, cautioning that such actions erode the democratic fiber of the nation.

It would, however, be more than Shyam's battle and about the very principle of free speech in
India. His case, along with that of the co-accused who challenged the charges before the
Supreme Court, had become some sort of touchstone for the commitment of the country's
custodians to holding or not holding the rights of its citizens. The judgment would come with
far-reaching implications and set a precedent on how a state will or will not use anti-terror laws
to suppress independent journalism. It is a much more personal story that Shyam has the right to
report on the truth, however unpalatable it may be to the powers that be. His story speaks
volumes to point out the cost of speaking out when, time and time again, dissent is equated with
sedition. It is also a call to action-that all who value democracy might stand in solidarity with
those who risk life and liberty in its defense.

Objectives of Content Analysis

✔ To assess the ethical considerations adhered by media - There are several factors that are

considered to be the pre-requisites by media before exercising their freedom of speech

and expression such as objectivity, respect of privacy, human dignity etcetera. It is
important to understand to what extent the said things are followed by the media while
reporting the incidents of UAPA against the journalist.

6
✔ To examine the impact of media coverage on public perception & legal proceedings - The

cases overviewed above per se depict that the outrage was seen amongst the people and
judiciary too played an eminent role in the incidents. It is important to understand to what
extent the media played a role in formulating the opinions of the public and highlight the
importance of addressing the issues by the protecting organ which is the judiciary.

✔ To study the coverage done by media with legitimate information - The need to exercise

the right to freedom of speech and expression with accuracy as well as verified
information is the need of the hour. It is important to study at what extent the media has
covered the incidents keeping in mind the veracity of the information being shared. The
news shared without accuracy tends to result in apocalyptic consequences.

✔ To evaluate the role of media in publishing news without being biased - Media role in

speaking truth without impartiality is an established notion. To a large extent, the media
dictates public opinion concerning the application of UAPA to journalists because all
reports revolve around the issue of misuse and public debate of free press. In this regard,
the media incites scrutiny over the law's potential misuse to silence dissent and curb
investigative journalism.

✔ To analyze the incidents of trial by media - The impact of media pressure on investigation

as well as the proceedings is something which is to be analyzed in order to restrict the

sub -judice by the media and encroach upon the work of the judiciary. Opinion forming is
an integral part of media; however, in contrast the media should not usurp the judicial
functions by carrying out unwarranted public debates which are acting prejudicial to the
subject matter.

Chapter II: Comprehension of News

7
A great variation in how the application of UAPA against journalists is interpreted can be found
as across media agendas, turns in political formations, editorial choices, and regional contexts.
Those news channels, which are on the government's side, advocate that UAPA should be
applied. It takes it as a panacea for protecting the national security while fighting terrorism. Such
channels generally tend to place such arrests of journalists under UAPA as steps necessary in
connection with unconstitutional activities or internal threats in a larger narrative for national
interest. Normally, in such cases, the tone in support of government actions and majestically
underscores the concern for legal and security apprehensions over those voiced for militarism in
the press.

On the contrary, free or independent media have a tendency to be balanced. They happen to be
the voice of the government since UAPA is described as needed, and the voice of the detractors
who feel that it can be misused. It will often talk about the role of a free press and democracy,
and whether UAPA is utilised to harass genuine journalism or dissent. From detailed analysis of
experts to opinions from legal fraternity and human rights organizations, that how the use of
UAPA against journalists is so completely complex can be well understood.

However, anti-governing channels make relentless criticism of the exercise by the government of
UAPA and portray it as a repressive tool. In fact, media outlets invariably focus on the chilling
effect such arrests have had on the freedom of the press, framing the issue on par with a more
general sweep of silence and clampdown on the national narrative. Personal narratives of
journalists targeted under UAPA remain the focal point-with claims at every step regarding the
lack of legitimacy of the charge as well as stretching of implications to involve larger democratic
values in India. In such a case, the coverage tends to be adversarial, that is to say that they are
attempting to expose what they find as politicization of anti-terror laws.

8
Regional and local channels are also very important in generating public perception especially in
sensitive areas that encompass conflict or political sensitivities.

The use of UAPA is also perceived much more skeptically in the areas of separatist movements
or insurgencies. Here, these channels are more importantly focusing on the human rights
dimension of such arrests, and local channels provide context-specific reporting that, in most
cases, reflect the concerns of their immediate audience; hence, they sometimes show sympathy
towards journalists and activists arrested under UAPA. The tone changes according to the
political character of the region, but they tend to target the questioning and protest regarding a
possible law abuse in one specific local affair.

Those who in the Internet criticize more than journalists the government's application of UAPA
include free news portals and other online medias. Long investigative reports, analyses by law of
applicability, and many opinion pieces criticizing the government's justification of using UAPA
often appear in the print or online pages of these medias. Their coverage often zeroes in on
broader implications for freedom of speech, democracy, and human rights. These portals can also
focus on cases that the mainstream press have ignored and therefore provide more space for
alternative or dissenting voices. In short, coverage of the application of UAPA against journalists
in India remains rather patchy. Government-tilted channels included it within the security
context; neutral ones did relatively balanced reporting; opposition-tilted channels emphasized the
issue of freedom of the press and repression; regional channels spoke to local apprehensions; and
digital media often took the lead by critiquing the misuse of UAPA. All this creates a
multicentric view system with the media, and public views of UAPA and its significance for
journalists will be different with different sources.

Chapter III: Analytical Findings

9
Some of the findings relate to the implications of the Unlawful Activities Act, as gleaned through
case law study and scholarly research, upon the journalists and media freedom in India. And
herein comes the synthesis of these analytic findings:

1. UAPA and the Persecution of Journalists

Application Cases: It is pretty underlined in cases like Arun Ferreira versus State of Maharashtra
and Gautam Navlakha versus National Investigation Agency that UAPA is used against
journalists and activists for leveling accusations against them of being associated with
organizations declared banned or showing anti-national activities. There is a possibility that the
charges might be employed to strangle dissent and weaken journalistic freedom.

Impact on Reporting: The application of UAPA in such cases largely keeps the journalists behind
bars and in courts for a long period of time. It keeps them away from actually reporting on
subjects considered sensitive or criticized by the government as undue action. This is a chilling
effect upon the press, where journalists may indulge in self-censorship so as to avoid legal
consequences.

2. Judicial Interpretation and Procedural Issues

Procedural Safeguards: In a very rare case, the court has reviewed the procedure in a UAPA
matter for adequacy of evidence and due process of law. Cases such as Rona Wilson vs. State of
Maharashtra leave a high value on evidentiary and admissible material in the recourse to UAPA
against one-journalists in the cases.

Judicial Review: There is some judicial review, but still the people's fear that judiciary will not
always be able to stall the people misusing UAPA rightly. The Court more often than not gets
caught in a delicate balance between national security and the individual's rights and thus results
in inconsistency.

3. Freedom of Speech and of the Press

10
Media Restrictions: The application of UAPA can vastly restrict the freedom of the press in
labeling free-ranging reporting or independent opinions as illegal activities. These restrictions
would downplay the freedom of the press to write about sensitive topics, including government
accountability and human rights abuse.

International and Domestic Criticism Internationally, many global bodies have criticized the use
of UAPA. Such organizations, along with several domestic civil rights groups, have opposed its
application, citing violation of freedom of the press. Reports by Amnesty International and
Human Rights Watch on concerns the Act poses about journalists and how it potentially stifles
dissent.

4. Political and Social Consequences The political use of UAPA: There are many complaints that
UAPA is politically used in cases relating to journalists and activists who have turned out to be
vocal critics of the government, and indeed legal challenges were thrown under the Act. Use in
this case may be considered a tool for political repression in disputed political climates. Impact
on Society : UAPA practices against journalists may lead to the suppression of public discourse
through censorship and the curtailment of knowledge flows so as to become more un-transparent.
It is more egregious in effect, considering countries where there are existing tensions whereby
media freedom is already under siege.

Impact on Public Perception and Legal Proceedings

This is one of the controversial moves, throwing up a controversy in the legal system as well as
amongst the public, by the use of UAPA against journalists. This was brought to law to combat
terror, keep a tab on illegality, and threats to national security, while applications against the
journalists out of mere suspicion not only called into question freedom of the press but went on
and on through possible legal misapplication.

Public View

11
Applying the UAPA to journalists disaffected public confidence in government as an attack on
free speech and independent journalism. "There is deep skepticism about the motives of the
government in using the law to prosecute dissent rather than legitimate security threats."
Overreach is looked upon poorly in the eyes of the public about the matter, which brings the
government into disrepute that had been corroded by the public, by media professionals, and
academics who felt it had overreached. Use of UAPA for arrest and prosecution of journalists
instills fear to promote self-censorship in the media. It might be more hesitant to report on
sensitive areas or anything against the administration for fear this will be used against them
legally. The press is hence much weaker in its watchdog function, hence lower standards in the
country and poor public debate.Public opinion has sharply polarized along lines of use of the
UAPA: government supporters maintain that accused journalists had become threats to national
security, while opponents argue in terms of attacks on democratic freedoms. The same is visible
in public protests, in social media debates, and strongly in media reporting itself.

Legal Proceedings

But since the application of UAPA in these cases filed against journalists, stronger judicial
review has taken place. There, the courts would have to maintain the fine balance between the
upholding of individual rights with that of national security, more so when strong bail conditions
have been imposed under the UAPA itself. Several releases, despite the strictures of the law,
have happened after the Courts dismissed evidence presented by the prosecution, as indeed in the
matter of journalist Siddique Kappan. Equally, judicial challenges have been raised on the
grounds of the propriety of UAPA in view of its definitions, which are often too broad and
undefined. Lawyers and advocates have reasoned that this law has flouted fundamental rights:
speech freedom, and a fair trial. This paper will dispute the fact that court hearings in these cases,
instead of considering the crime and punishment, have led to the arguments whether the law
requires an overhaul to prevent misuse against journalists. Similarly, the judgments pronounced
in these cases also established the legal precedents that are very significant and would dictate
how in the times to come UAPA would be interpreted. Many such courts, on the question of
giving bail, have also cited many courts in favor of freedom of the press and that there needs to
be some concrete evidence regarding the application of such stringent law that might raise a
question over the application of UAPA itself and nullify the misuse of the same against

12
journalists or suppression of the freedom of speech. After all, it is this type of intense public
debate and scrutiny vis-à-vis UAPA against journalists, which is proof that this sort of treatment
needs to be in balance between the protection of democratic values and the need to provide
national security.

Chapter IV: Clinching Remarks

Media coverage of the arrest of Indian journalists under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act
reflects stark divisions of opinion and fissures between more comprehensive concerns of national
security versus press freedom. The government news services usually described journalists'
arrests under UAPA as necessary for countering terrorism and for protecting the nation from
these internal menaces, well within the realm of keeping an eye on the bigger picture of national
interest while conveniently quieting concerns over freedom of expression. Independent and
neutral media portrayals are mostly balanced. Not negating the importance of national security,
they are much more liberal to nurture feelings that UAPA can become draconian even while
handling journalists and potential dissolution of dissents too. These portals investigate how one
has to balance security with democratic values-not to forget freedom of the press.Quite often,
opposition slants and critical news platforms make any move of UAPA against journalists and
others attempt at silencing some voices that dare challenge the government. Opposition slants
and critical news platforms point out general issues to democracy and hint that how such actions
may create fear silencing independent journalists and free voices.

Regional and Internet media coverage is often more regionalized or specialized; for example,
they may represent specific concerns of affected communities or provide critical legal analysis.
Such reviews might focus more particularly on case studies of individual applications and

13
implications of the UAPA on human rights.The stories of media vision tell people and decide the
future course of national as well as international debates on UAPA. While advocating security or
freedom, this intervention of the media is highly essential in this debate for informing the public
understanding and spurring debate over the impact that this law would throw on India's
democratic fabric.

Implications of Findings & Recommendations

The unauthorized use of UAPA by Indian journalists has greatly sparked their worries about
press freedom and democracy, which has also had a knock-on effect on India's reputation abroad.
Although this Act was intended to combat terrorism, it is now frequently used in situations where
journalists are involved. There are concerns that it could be abused to stifle criticism and
dissenting opinions. The trend therefore had a very chilling effect on the media. Journalists in
these nations might, for example, choose to self-censor in order to avoid being sued, which
would lessen their ability to hold the powerful accountable and enlighten the public. Since free
speech and open debate are essential to democracy, this conduct is incompatible with democratic
values. The illegal application of UAPA on journalists in India has hugely alarmed their
concerns about press freedom and democracy, having its own ripple effect on the international
image of India. In fact, this Act was designed for anti-terrorism purposes but has increasingly
been applied to cases with involvement from journalists. Fears have been raised of its misuse to
suppress dissent and critical reporting. Thus, the trend brought an enormous chilling effect on the
media. For instance, there are possibilities that journalists in such countries may resort to self-
censorship in order not to be sued-a factor that weakens their role to hold power accountable and
keep the public well informed. This practice goes against democratic values, as democracy
thrives on free speech, open debate, and a free press. Furthermore, the use of UAPA against
journalists can be seen from one case to another, insinuating that dissent or some investigative
journalism or other independent reports come with harsh legal repercussions, leading to a less
well-informed populace and greater autocracy in government. Apart from the legal dilemmas in
balancing national security imperatives with individual freedoms due to stringent provisions like
difficult bail conditions and broad elastic definitions of "unlawful activities," various courts have

14
emphasized the need to have concrete evidence before the application of such stern measures
against journalists. The cases, on the other hand, are always related to prolonged detentions with
rigorous legal gymnastics. This has tarnished the image of India, as a leading democracy,
internationally. The international human rights groups and media have already condemned the
use of UAPA against journalists, suggesting it goes against democratic values and that this may
affect India's relations with other countries and its standing during discussions on human rights.
Recommended next steps include reforms to the UAPA to prevent abuses, further improvements
to the exercise of judicial discretion, protection of freedom of the press, and an increase in
training on law enforcement. International dialogue and public advocacy will be required so that
the UAPA is not used to stifle free speech in order to safeguard India's democratic foundation.

Chapter V: References

The Strangling Grip of UAPA: Silencing Arundhati Roy and the Voices of Dissent -
https://thewire.in/law/the-strangling-grip-of-uapa-silencing-arundhati-roy-and-the-voices-of-
dissent/?mid_related_new

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

C. Raj Kumar, "The Legal Framework for Counter-Terrorism: The PATRIOT Act and its Indian
Counterpart," Journal of Comparative Law, 2005.

A. Sharma, "Comparative Analysis of Anti-Terrorism Legislation in India and the US,"

International Journal of Law and Policy, 2010.

A. Paliwal, "Judicial Review of Anti-Terrorism Laws in India," Indian Constitutional Law

Review, 2012.

S. Gupta, "The Impact of Judicial Interpretation on UAPA," Legal Studies Quarterly, 2015.

B. Verma, "The Political Use of UAPA in India," Political Science Review, 2017.

N. Rao, "Social Impact of Anti-Terrorism Laws on Minority Communities," Journal of Social

Justice, 2020.
15
K. Patel, "Public Perception of Anti-Terrorism Legislation," Media and Society, 2022.

A. Singh, "Reforming UAPA: Balancing Security and Rights," Legal Reform Journal, 2023.

Center for Policy Research, "Recommendations for Anti-Terrorism Law Reforms," 2022.

R. Kumar, "Enhancing Accountability in Anti-Terrorism Legislation," Journal of Policy Studies,

2021.

Case laws

The Wire v. Union of India (2021)

Rona Wilson v. The State of Maharashtra (2020)
Sajjan Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2018)
Gautam Navlakha v. National Investigation Agency (2020)
Arun Ferreira v. State of Maharashtra (2019)

16