Central idea

The Supreme Court lifted a broadcasting ban on a Malayalam news channel ‘MediaOne’.
The court blasted the government for silencing voices in the media who “speak truth to power” by branding them as “anti-establishment”.

A quick recap of the case

The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) has earlier refused to renew broadcast license of a Malayalam news channel.
The Ministry of Home Affairs had declined to grant security clearance to the channel’s promoters citing alleged links between radical groups.
Hence the news agency approached Kerala High Court, which upheld the ban on February 9, 2022
The Supreme Court granted temporary relief and allowed it to resume operations.

The Supreme Court set aside earlier ban orders and upheld the channel’s appeal on two procedural grounds, namely

The Court stated that the burden shifts on the Centre to prove that the procedure followed was reasonable and in compliance with the requirements of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
The Court used the standard of proportionality to test the reasonableness of the procedure in the present case and assessed the validity of public interest immunity claims based on the “structured proportionality standard”.
The Court found that the reasons for denying security clearance to the channel were not legitimate purposes for the restriction of the right of freedom of speech protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

The principles of natural justice are a set of procedural rules that ensure fairness and justice in administrative and legal proceedings.
These principles are based on the fundamental idea that everyone is entitled to a fair hearing, and they are aimed at preventing arbitrary or biased decisions by decision-makers.
The SC bench allowed the challenge to the MHA order and judgment of the High Court on account of the principles of natural justice constitutionalized by its judgment in its 1978 ruling in “Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India”
Actions which violate procedural guarantees can be struck down even if non-compliance does not prejudice the outcome of the case.

The principle requires that the decision or action must be proportionate to the objective it seeks to achieve.
In other words, the means employed to achieve the objective must be no more than necessary to achieve it, and the harm caused by the decision or action must not be excessive in relation to the benefit gained.
The validity of the claim of involvement of national security considerations must be assessed on the test of whether there is material to conclude that the non-disclosure of information is in the interest of national security.
Courts can assess the validity of public interest immunity claims based on the “structured proportionality standard”, said the SC.
The SC observed that sealed cover proceedings infringe the principles natural justice and open justice.

The Court’s ruling has been welcomed by media organizations and civil society groups as a victory for freedom of speech and expression
The Court observed that the duty to act fairly derived from common law is not exhaustively defined in a set of concrete principles, and the concept of natural justice “cannot be put into a ‘straitjacket formula’.
The ruling has been hailed as a victory for freedom of speech and expression, and a blow to attempts to stifle dissent and critical voices in the media.