EC acted in haste on registration of FIR against Modi, says Jaitley
A public meeting is a public meeting; the media byte is not a public meeting, said Jaitley.
Press Trust of India | New Delhi | May 1, 2014 3:27 pm
When Constitutional institutions react in haste and even anger, they miss out the larger vision, said Jaitley. (PTI)BJP leader Arun Jaitley on Thursday questioned the Election Commission’s order for registration of an FIR against Narendra Modi and said it acted in “haste and anger” and the interpretation given by it may fall foul of Constitutional provisions.
Jaitley said the poll body has missed out the larger vision as the meaning of criminal law cannot be stretched out and definition of polling area be defined as Modi was not inside the polling station while giving a media byte after voting like other leaders elsewhere in the country.
“When Constitutional institutions react in haste and even anger, they miss out the larger vision. Criminal law provisions are to be strictly construed. Their meaning can’t be stretched out.
“A public meeting is a public meeting; the media byte is not a public meeting. If media is to be prosecuted for displaying comments of politicians on a voting day such a provision will fall foul of constitutional guarantee of free speech since it is not covered by the prescribed restrictions under Article 19 (2),” Jaitley said in an article on his blog.
Citing examples of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Nobel laureate Amartya Sen and other leaders who spoke to media after casting their vote, the BJP leader said, “I am only illustrating that an interpretation being given by the EC may fall foul.”
He said Article 324 of the Constitution is a reservoir of residuary jurisdiction and it cannot impact areas occupied by law. “It cannot dilute the import and content of the right to free speech,” he said.
On defining the polling area, Jaitley said if the whole country is a polling area as scattered and phased elections are on in several parts of India, the political rallies and their reportage by media when polling is going on in some other parts of the country, would attract penal consequences.
He said the EC’s order makes it appear that the entire country could be a polling area since the media comment could be seen in every part of the country.
Jaitley said every time senior politicians cast their vote, a large number of media persons assemble outside the polling station and they freely interact with media by making short comments and that is precisely what Modi did.
“He was not expected to be rude enough and give the media no comments,” he said.http://indianexpress.com/article/india/politics/ec-acted-in-haste-on-registration-of-fir-against-modi-says-jaitley/
May 1, 2014
The Duty to Vote
It is mentioned in several election speeches that even one vote can make a difference. Every eligible voter has a right to vote. He also has a duty to cast a vote. I was faced with a heavy odd having been Member of the Rajya Sabha Gujarat for three times in a row. Since my vote is enrolled in the Gandhinagar Parliamentary Constituency. Do I leave my own constituency in Amritsar to cast my vote or do I skip my vote? I started my day very early with a visit to the Golden Temple and the Durgiana Mandir. I travelled to each of the nine assembly segments. By the time almost 50 percent of the votes had been cast, my wife and I flew in to Gandhinagar to cast the vote. I was back in Amritsar by the evening. It was tiresome but satisfying. Those who missed the vote failed in their primary duty as a citizen.
It is mentioned in several election speeches that even one vote can make a difference. Every eligible voter has a right to vote. He also has a duty to cast a vote. I was faced with a heavy odd having been Member of the Rajya Sabha Gujarat for three times in a row. Since my vote is enrolled in the Gandhinagar Parliamentary Constituency. Do I leave my own constituency in Amritsar to cast my vote or do I skip my vote? I started my day very early with a visit to the Golden Temple and the Durgiana Mandir. I travelled to each of the nine assembly segments. By the time almost 50 percent of the votes had been cast, my wife and I flew in to Gandhinagar to cast the vote. I was back in Amritsar by the evening. It was tiresome but satisfying. Those who missed the vote failed in their primary duty as a citizen.
FIR against Mr. Modi
Every time senior politicians cast their vote, a large number of media persons assemble outside the polling station. They want their comments on their own vote and also on the trend of the elections. The politicians freely interact with the media. They make short comments and then leave. This is precisely what Mr. Narendra Modi did. He was not expected to be rude enough and give the media no comments.
The Election Commission of India has directed that an FIR under section 126(1)(a) and section 126(1)(b) be registered against Mr. Modi and the media organizations which have telecast his bite through the media. The substance of the allegations in the Election Commission’s order is that within the ‘polling area’, a ‘public meeting’ has been held. Polling was in progress in various parts of the country. Since the comment has been telecast during the polling hours and the Lotus symbol displayed, both Mr. Narendra Modi and the media are liable. From the Election Commission’s order, it is not clear as to what the definition of ‘polling area’ is. Is it the polling station? In any event the comment was made outside the polling station. The Election Commission’s order makes it appear that the entire country could be a polling area since the media comment could be seen in every part of the country.
When Constitutional institutions react in haste and even anger, they miss out the larger vision. Criminal law provisions are to be strictly construed. Their meaning can’t be stretched out. A public meeting is a public meeting, the media bite is not a public meeting. If media is to be prosecuted for displaying comments of politicians on a voting day such a provision will fall foul of constitutional guarantee of free speech since it is not covered by the prescribed restrictions under Article 19 (2). If the whole country is a polling area, since scattered and phased elections are on in several parts of India, the political rallies and their reportage by the media when polling is going on in some other parts of the country, would attract penal consequences. Prof. Amartya Sen spoke to the media after his vote yesterday. He gave his reasons why he does not favour Modi. The Prime Minister spoke to the media after casting his vote in Assam. So did most other political leaders. I am not pleading for their prosecution. I am only illustrating that an interpretation being given by the Election Commission may fall foul.
Article 324 of the Constitution is a reservoir of residuary jurisdiction. It can’t impact areas occupied by law. It cannot dilute the import and content of the right to free speech.
The ‘Snoopgate’ Commission
Media reports have indicated that the lame duck UPA Government is finally planning to name a judge for the ‘Snoopgate’ Commission. The Commission of Inquiry is already on in Gujarat. Both the lady in question and her family have already sent their statements to the National Women’s Commission. So far all judges approached by the UPA have refused to lend themselves in this political and malafide exercise. 438 Parliament constituencies have already seen polling. In a fortnight, the results will be out and a new government will be in. I will be very curious to know the name of the Judge who has agreed to ‘lend’ himself to the UPA. I will be surprised if there is one. I hope, for the cause of judicial dignity, no one agrees to be a part of this desperate exercise.
Media reports have indicated that the lame duck UPA Government is finally planning to name a judge for the ‘Snoopgate’ Commission. The Commission of Inquiry is already on in Gujarat. Both the lady in question and her family have already sent their statements to the National Women’s Commission. So far all judges approached by the UPA have refused to lend themselves in this political and malafide exercise. 438 Parliament constituencies have already seen polling. In a fortnight, the results will be out and a new government will be in. I will be very curious to know the name of the Judge who has agreed to ‘lend’ himself to the UPA. I will be surprised if there is one. I hope, for the cause of judicial dignity, no one agrees to be a part of this desperate exercise.