Law Protecting Journalists from Online Harassment

Introduction:

From the very Independence of India, media is one of the important pillars of democracy which had also helped in the course of the quest for independence during the pre-independence period. Media is the instrument that has maintained the essence of democracy and slowly and slightly it has become the habit of citizens to rely on the media. Media is the chain between politics, politicians, government, and citizens which provide information to them on which they cast their votes as per their decision. They serve as watchdogs and provide information on those to whom we as a citizen cannot interact or inquire. The role of the media in a democracy is as crucial as that of the politician and should never be underestimated. The status of the media is not less than politicians in our country. Media is the medium that makes people aware of those pieces of stuff to which they are severely ignorant. Democracy is meaningless without a free, neutral, and active media.

Brief Discussion

In this media concept, a journalist plays a key role in its operation. A journalist is a person who works in media or journalism to report the news. They may work on their own as a freelancer or for a newspaper, a radio or television program. Telling the truth is a very important part of all journalism jobs. But by the time the carriers of these media activities i.e. journalists are under constant threat. Threats can be in direct or indirect form. They feel attacked if they try to come up with some revealing truth. Apart from the direct threat of being attacked at any time, there is a constant threat of online harassment to the journalist. Online harassment typically refers to unwanted verbal and non-verbal behaviour that occurs online which:

1. Violate the dignity of a person.
2. Creates a hostile, degrading, or offensive environment, sometimes virtual and sometimes real.

Online harassment can take place in many forms:

• Impersonation
• Doxing
• Exclusion
• Threat
• Technical attack
• Trolling- concern trolling, flaming, raiding, in-person trolling, gender trolling, etc.

For journalists, social media or online platforms opens up a large platform to convey anything informative at a large scale but there are several people who make this online atmosphere unbearable and scary for them. In 2017, in the survey of the International Press Institute (IPI), it was estimated that in the collection of 1065 examples of online harassment 82% include some form of abusive behaviour. Perpetrators create technical interference as well by hacking IDs, creating online traffic, etc. In journalism women, journalists are particularly vulnerable to online harassment. In a study of twitter accounts, female television journalists were three times more likely to receive harassing tweets than their male counterparts. According to the 2017 Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders, India ranked 136 out of 180, a position quite out of keeping with India’s image as the world’s most populous democracy. Since 1992, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, 43 journalists have been killed in India. The number tallied by the International Federation of Journalists is far higher: 73 journalists killed since 2005. Nine journalists were killed in 2015, one of them allegedly set on fire by policemen working for a politician accused of rape. Five were murdered in 2016. In the cases of 30 journalists murdered since 2010 being tracked by the Indian media watchdog The Hoot, there has been exactly one conviction.

The Need for Protection of Journalists

Promoting the safety of journalists and combating impunity for those who attack them are central elements within UNESCO’s support for press freedom on all media platforms. On average, every five days a journalist is killed for bringing information to the public. Attacks on media professionals are often planned in non-conflict situations by organized crime groups, militia, security personnel, and even local police, making local journalists among the most vulnerable. These attacks include murder, abductions, harassment, intimidation, illegal arrest, and arbitrary detention. Impunity for crimes against the media fuels and perpetuates the cycle of violence and the resulting self-censorship deprives society of information and further affects press freedom. It directly impacts the United Nations’ human rights-based efforts to promote peace, security, and sustainable development.

Recent Example

We cannot forget the very recent example of journalist Gauri Lankesh, the editor and publisher of a Bangalore weekly, the Gauri Lankesh Patrike, who was an outspoken left-wing journalist working in India. Last September, as the journalist Gauri Lankesh was returning to her home from work, a man approached her in the driveway, his face obscured by a motorcycle helmet. He fired a pistol as she ran toward her house, about 10 feet away. She collapsed before she made it inside. Autopsy reports suggested she had been shot twice in the chest and once in the back. A fourth shot had missed or misfired. The footage from security cameras showed only two men on a motorcycle, including the helmeted shooter, a man about five feet tall, but the police suggested that two other men had also been involved, following the first pair on a second motorcycle.

India’s Legal Base on Online Harassment of Journalists

The freedom of the press on the part of journalists is stated by the Constitution of India as the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1) (a)[1]. Regarding this, the Indian Press Commission says that “Democracy can thrive not only under the vigilant eye of the legislature but also under the care and guidance of public opinion and the press is par excellence, the vehicle through which opinion cab becomes articulate”.

Freedom of the press is a constitutionally guaranteed fundamental right Article 19 and it is the collective duty of citizens and authorities to uphold the right. The kinds of threats that journalists are facing either online or offline are the violation of that very right. Due to these increasing cases of online harassment and continuous bullying of women journalists in 2017, the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) introduced the Byteback Campaign to fight against cyberbullying calling for strong action to stop cyberbullying and online harassment.

Advance Research in Digital Forensic (ARDC) defines cyberstalking as an act that entails several activities of online harassment meant to torment or terrorize the victim. Under section 66A of the IT Act, perpetrators can be penalized or imprisoned up to three years for committing this crime.

Section 354D of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with stalking in all forms. Whoever commits the offence of stalking shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; and be punished on a second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable for fine. Section 499 of the IPC covers defamation, wherein, anyone making derogatory remarks on social media, or posting obscene images or videos in public can be liable for jail time of two years or fine, or with both.

Under Section 354A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), those posting lewd comments on social media can be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a year which may extend to three years and can be asked to pay a fine too. Those posting and messaging pornographic content without a woman’s consent or requesting sexual favours can be imprisoned for three years under the same section. This new provision has its origin in the judgment of the Supreme Court dealing with the issue of sexual harassment in workplaces. The suggestions given by the Supreme Court got statutory recognition by the enactment of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act 2013.

Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) protects women against voyeurism. If a man, without the consent of a woman, is found to be capturing photographs or videos while being engaged in a private act, he is punishable by law for one to three years and fine.

Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) protects victims against harassment through remarks on social media or by posting lewd photographs that could help in this case. Even Section 507 of the IPC, which addresses that whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation by an anonymous communication, or having taken the precaution to conceal the name or abode of the person from whom the threat comes, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, in addition to the punishment provided for the offence by the last preceding Section of 506 of Indian Penal Code.

A complaint can be filed anywhere regarding cybercrimes, as cybercrimes don’t have any prior jurisdiction. As per the ARDC, you can approach three places in any city to complain a suspect:

• Cyber cells: For any kind of cyber-related crime is addressed by cyber cells, they especially deal with the victim of cybercrimes. Suppose if there is no cyber cell in your jurisdiction then you can simply lodge an FIR in the local police station as well. One can reach the police commissioner if he or she cannot file FIR in the respective police station. A police station must lodge an FIR.

• The National Commission for Women: This organization is formed for women victims of online harassment which will deal with the police on behalf of the victim. The commission has the authority to collect shreds of evidence, inquiries, summon the accused, interrogating witnesses, etc.

• Reporting on social media websites: Apart from the abovementioned to solutions there is an option of reporting the particular account or host who is committing the offence. Nowadays most of the websites have the option of reporting the crime since they are directed to do so under the IT rules 2011, which directs them to take action within 36 hours of reporting to stop the abusive and offensive content from spreading.

In India, Maharashtra is the only state to pass a bill on the protection of journalists i.e., Maharashtra Media Person and Media Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage or Loss to Property) Bill, 2017. This will was passed in tenure of CM Devendra Fadnavis Government which recommends up to 3 years of punishment and fine up to Rs. 50000 or both as the case may be. Acts of violence against media persons will be treated as a cognizable and non-bailable offence and also this type of case will be investigated under an officer, not below the rank of Deputy SP or ACP.

International Legal Base on Online Harassment of Journalists

The United Nations General Assembly issued a resolution on the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity addressing violence, intimidation, and harassment of journalists, especially female journalists, online and offline. The General Assembly called upon states “to create and maintain, in law and practice, a safe and enabling environment for journalists to perform their work independently and without undue interference.”

The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), in April 2019, directed its members to frame a committee just for the protection of journalists and that would include:

1. Representatives of the prosecutor’s office.
2. The police and journalist associations to verify that all attacks and threats are properly investigated.
3. Improve procedures if needed.
4. Propose protection measures when necessary and implement preventive action to reinforce the security of journalists.

In Australia, federal legislation is issued targeting the non-consensual sharing of images on an online platform. And now after this legislation e-safety commissioner keeps a check on this, operates a complaint system and also processes removal notices regarding non- consensual sharing of any kind online.

Further in England and Wales, the law provides a facility to request website operators to remove any kind of defamatory material from the website.

In Germany, the laws impose liability on the hosting provider to delete harassing or threatening messages published by third parties on their platform after any such prior notification. Under legislation adopted in 2017, in case of the absolute illegal threat the provider must have to respond and comply with the complaint within 24 hours, otherwise, they have seven days to respond.  Noncompliance results in fines. However, the requirement applies only to networks that have two million or more registered users in Germany.

Japan’s Internet Provider Liability Act similarly facilitates the removal of offensive online information, and obtaining information on the identity of the offender for later legal actions is made easier by limiting the providers’ liability.

Conclusion

Nowadays, somewhere the media is losing its sanctity and image as if we analyze it concerning past centuries. From truth revealing and informing agency, it is now mixed up with lots of propaganda and biasedness. But we cannot forget they have an important place in a democratic structure and apart from anything which is happening nowadays they have freedom of press and expression just like other citizens of the country. And any kind of threat or harassment of media person is a threat to this very fundamental right i.e. Article 19(1) (a). There are laws and legislation to protect journalists from any kind of online and offline threat and harassment.

Increasingly journalists, especially women journalists are facing online harassment, defamation, abuse, cyberbullying, trolling, public shaming, and threats. That is why there is a need for more effective laws for the protection of media and journalists.

---

Reference:

[1] Article 19(1)(a) in The Constitution Of India 1949-  to freedom of speech and expression.