Tags:
Journalism of Courage
PUNE, Jan 3: The Press Council of India (PCI) at its sitting at Calcutta on December 1, 1998, decided that no action was warranted in a complaint filed by Sunanda Das, secretary and founder, Blue Cross Society of Pune, 24/1, Koregaon Park, Pune 411001, against the Pune edition of The Indian Express and dropped the matter.
Following is the text of the PCI decision:
“Smt Sunanda Das, Secretary, Blue Cross Society of Pune, filed this complaint dated October 25, 1997 against Pune Newsline edition of The Indian Express newspaper for publishing allegedly misleading, malicious and one-sided columns/letters/articles/news items on “stray dogs.”
“The complainant alleged that the respondent had carried a deliberate and sustained campaign to undermine and sabotage the annual birth control/anti-rabies programme of the Animal Welfare Board of India which is a part of the Ministry of Environment. The complainant submitted that all the statements were grossly exaggerated, baseless, misconceived and devoid of factual back-up.
The complainant alleged that by using the publication to influence public opinion in one direction only and by deliberately not publishing letters written by persons with long experience in the field who oppose the restart of killings for good reasons, clearly showed the partiality of the respondent. The complainant has submitted that they had many a time brought to the notice of the respondent the wrong statement made by them but to no avail.
“The respondent editor in his written statement denied the allegations levelled by the complainant and submitted that they only encouraged a public debate on stray dog problems and the Annual Birth Control programme, by publishing views expressed for and against the said programme. The respondent denied that they had any intention to sabotage the programme and to defame the name of the society. The respondent submitted that they had published very detailed letters written by the complainant.
“The complainant society was forwarded copy of the written statement received from the editor. In its rejoinder, the complainant submitted that they had a right to expect that the criticism would be fair and professional, particularly where the activity was non-profitable, socially-oriented and a part of the long standing government programme.
“The respondent in his counter, reiterated what he had submitted in his written statement dated May 27, 1998.
“The matter was called out for hearing before the Inquiry Committee at Delhi on October 6, 1998. There was no appearance from either side. The respondent newspaper had however requested for the adjournment of the case which was not acceded to by the committee.
“The Inquiry Committee considered the material on record. It opined that the respondent had published both the versions, thereby giving balanced views on the subject. The committee was of the opinion that no action was warranted in the matter. It, therefore, recommended to the council to drop the matter.
“The Press Council, on consideration of the records of the case and the report of the Inquiry Committee, accepts the reasons, findings and the recommendations of the Inquiry Committee and decides accordingly”.
