Small-Town Journalists Face Higher Risk of Getting Arrested, Only 3% Protected: Study

New Delhi: ‘Process is the punishment’ for journalists across India, reveals a new study released on Tuesday. The report, jointly carried out by the Clooney Foundation for Justice’s TrialWatch Initiative, the National Law University Delhi and Columbia Law School’s Human Rights Institute, reveals that in the cases of criminalisation of journalists, there are significant delays at each stage of a case, often resulting in financial hardship, heightened fear and anxiety, and substantial disruptions to both their personal and professional lives.

Titled Pressing Charges: A Study of Criminal Cases Against Journalists Across States in India, the report states, “Out of 244 cases for which we had data on the status of the case, more than 65% had not been completed as of October 30, 2023.” It also notes that the police had not even completed their investigation in 40% of the cases for which we had relevant data. And only 16 cases (6%) saw a concluded trial – ending in conviction or acquittal.

The study also reveals that journalists in small cities and towns, or those reporting for local outlets, were arrested far more frequently than those in major cities. As per the report, journalists’ experience of the justice system also differed based on their location and status. 

“While journalists in major metropolises were arrested in 24% of the total incidents recorded in such cities, this figure increased to 58% for journalists in small cities/towns. This, in turn, was linked to journalists’ access to justice,” it states.  

More strikingly, in 65% of the incidents involving journalists from major metropolises, they secured interim protection from arrest, while the corresponding figure for small-town journalists was a mere 3%. 

According to the study, this can potentially be explained by the fact that this relief was most often granted by the Supreme Court, which has a single seat in Delhi. Journalists working in Hindi and other regional languages suffered from a similarly adverse ratio in relation to counterparts working in English. “That is, our data suggests that while the process is the punishment, the pain it inflicts may be proportional to the accused’s distance from the national capital,” noted the report. 

The study was based on an analysis of a novel dataset consisting of information on 423 criminal cases registered against 427 journalists across the states and union territories of India. It covers a total of 624 incidents of criminalisation of journalists in relation to their work from 2012-2022.

For the report, 48 journalists were interviewed, reflecting a representative cross-section of the journalists in the broader dataset. According to the report, the cases against journalists have profound ramifications for journalists’ ability to continue to do their crucial work: 58% of the journalists interviewed reported experiencing financial hardship, 56% reported feelings of fear or anxiety because of the case(s) against them, 73% identified an impact on their personal lives and 56% said the case(s) had negatively affected their careers.

Moreover, the families of the journalists also had to face harrowing time. “My family was deeply harrowed by my absence [following their arrest], especially my little children who were so worried. Cases like these don’t just target individuals; they tear families apart. Ultimately, they make you beg on your knees," a journalist interviewed for the study told the researchers.

“At TrialWatch, our goal is to reveal how authorities at every level and across different countries are expanding the playbook to target journalists and restrict speech,” said Stephen Townley, legal director of CFJ’s TrialWatch. “The report adds a new perspective to a global discussion while providing valuable data to Indian stakeholders.”

According to Prof. Anup Surendranath, who supervised the study at National Law University, Delhi, “the report has considerable constitutional significance. It shows you how the constitutionally protected freedom of the press is being eroded by the application of regular criminal law and procedure.”

The study further notes that the cases nearly always rested on vague provisions and failed to account for India’s free speech protections and the new Indian penal code – Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) – that came into effect in 2024 did not change many of the vague and broad laws used in these cases.

“This suggests that they may remain just as susceptible to abuse. Further, the BNS has added new vague laws, such as Section 195(1)(d), which criminalizes “false or misleading information jeopardizing the sovereignty, unity, and integrity or security of India,” the report notes.

The study also records that this means that the threat to journalism in India will likely remain acute. 

“At the same time, it is not only journalists, strictly speaking, who are doing the kinds of work that are likely to expose them to these threats going forward. Whistleblowers seeking and exposing information, ‘citizen journalists,’ and others are also at risk of prosecution and silencing,” the report concludes.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.