Bail to Arnab Goswami a boost to free speech, media

The Supreme Court has not just granted bail to Republic TV editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami but also raised important questions pertaining to individual liberty and the powers of government in criminal cases. This is a much-needed relief to not just Goswami but to the entire media, indeed anybody who criticizes the powers that be.

One has to be a partisan of the coalition running the Maharashtra government to believe or assert that the abetment to suicide case against Gowami surfaced on its own or that the law was taking its own course. This is not to say that the reopening of the case against Goswami lacks merit; even if there is merit in the case, the arrest was not made because of that merit. It was retaliatory in nature, the result of Goswami’s relentless campaigns against the state government on different matters.

An apex court bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Indira Banerjee justified its intervention, saying, “If we as a constitutional court do not lay down law and protect liberty, then who will?”

Questioning the arrest and its rationale, Chandrachud asked, “We are assuming the allegations of FIR as gospel truth, but even then, is a case of Section 306 made out? In a matter like this, when some dues were not paid, would a suicide mean abetment? Would it not be a travesty of justice if someone is denied bail for this?”

Appearing for Goswami, senior counsel Harish Salve presented a fine argument: “The person [who committed suicide] was in financial difficulty and, thereafter, committed suicide, but how can it be abetment to suicide? For abetment there must be direct and indirect act of the commission of the offence. If tomorrow, a person commits suicide in Maharashtra and blames government, then will the Chief Minister be arrested?”

The answer is simple: no. But, unfortunately, this ‘no’ is not the result of commonsensical understanding or of the law; this is because the police is under the state government; and cops dare not arrest those whom they report to. This is a dangerous situation, closer to the rule of men and women than to the rule of law.

As I wrote earlier, “The rule of law, which is the basis of civilization, implies preexisting, objective pieces of legislation that govern life in a country. The true ruler is not a man or a group of men and women but the law; those who govern do so in accordance with the predefined rules and regulations. It is the law that is majestic, not the men and women enforcing it. This is the reason that in monarchies royal personages, embodying the law, are addressed as ‘Your Majesty’ and referred to as ‘His or Her Majesty’.”

Read also: <a href="https://indianarrative.com/opinion/cases-against-arnab-goswami-undermine-the-rule-of-law-1436.html">https://indianarrative.com/opinion/cases-against-arnab-goswami-undermine-the-rule-of-law-1436.html</a>

Goswami is clearly being targeted by the Maharashtra government. The apex court slammed it for this. As Chandrachud said, “If we don’t interfere in this case today, we will walk on a path of destruction. If left to me, I won’t watch the channel and you may differ in ideology, but constitutional courts will have to protect such freedoms…”

Read also: <a href="https://indianarrative.com/opinion/first-they-came-for-arnab-goswami-and-republic-tv-18685.html">https://indianarrative.com/opinion/first-they-came-for-arnab-goswami-and-republic-tv-18685.html</a>

The Supreme Court has upheld the cause of individual liberty; and it should be unequivocally lauded for this.

Against this backdrop, Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Dushyant Dave’s objection to the “selective listing” of Goswami’s case doesn’t seem to be sound. In a letter to the Secretary General of the Supreme Court, he wrote, “The serious issue here is selective listing of matters that the registry under your leadership is indulging in for last eight months during Covid pandemic. While thousands of citizens remain in jails, languishing for long periods while their matters filed before the Supreme Court are not getting listed for weeks and months, it is, to say the least, deeply disturbing as to how and why every time Goswami approaches the Supreme Court, his matter gets listed instantly.”

Instead of objecting to the listing of Goswami’s case, Dave should be striving to get those who are languishing in jail because of the coronavirus. If rich people get good healthcare, those who claim to be philanthropic should work to make it available to the poor; they shouldn’t complain about the better hospital facilities that the rich get, surely not try to shut down private hospitals.

In a country where the sphere of liberty is shrinking, any decision that helps check this process should be welcomed wholeheartedly. Bail to Goswami is one such decision..